IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.2296 of 2011 1. GUDDU MAHALDAR 2. MUKESH MAHALDAR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 03 15.04.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Addl. P.P. for the State. Petitioners are named in the first information report with direct allegation of gang rape. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that petitioner no.1 is presently residing at the village of his maternal grand father to look after his property and as a matter of fact, his maternal grand father as well as his other family members were eliminated by one Biso @ Bishwanath Mahaldar and others for which Korha P.S. Case no. 43/1993 was instituted and in the aforesaid case, above stated Biso @ Bishwanath Mahaldar as well as other accused persons faced trial and they were convicted by the learned Ist Addl. Sessions Judge, Katihar in Sessions Trial no. 2/1994 vide judgment dated 19.9.1995. It is further pointed out by him that after serving out the sentence, the above stated Biso @ Bishwanath Mahaldar came out of jail and subsequently, they managed the informant with the help of daughter-in-law of the above stated Biso @ Bishwanath Mahaldar who happens to be Mukhiya of the village and got instituted the instant false case against the petitioners and other accused persons. It is further pointed out by him hat when the informant was medically examined, no sign of rape was found on her person rather doctor has opined that she had been used for sexual purposes since long. - 2 - On the other hand, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor opposes the prayer submitting not only the informant supported the story of gang rape but also several witnesses have stated that they had seen the petitioners and other accused persons fleeing away from the place of the occurrence. Although petitioners are languishing in jail custody since 1.10.2010 but taking into consideration the above stated facts as well as submissions of the parties, I do not feel it proper to release them on bail. Accordingly, their prayer for bail in connection with Korha P.S. Case no. 12/2010 stands rejected. However, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Katihar is directed to commit the case of the petitioners to the court of sessions in accordance with law within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order and furthermore, the learned Sessions Judge, Katihar is directed to proceed with the trial of the petitioners and conclude the trial within six months from the date of receipt of the record after commitment. It is made clear that if the trial of the petitioners is not concluded within the above stated period, the petitioners may renew their prayer for bail before the learned Sessions Judge, Katihar itself. shahid (Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J)