IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR.MISC. NO.475 OF 2011 SANTOSH KUMAR,@ SANTOSH SINGH, S/O SACHHIDANAND SINGH, VILLAGE CHAKWARI TOLA, SAMASTIPUR, P.S SAHEBPURKAMAL, DISTRICT BEGUSARAI. …………………PETITIONER. VERSUS THE STATE OF BIHAR. ………………………OPPOSITE PARTY. ----------- 05/ 12.10.2011 Heard counsel for the petitioner. No one appears for the State. By an order dated 07.11.2009 while rejecting the prayer for bail of the petitioner facing trial for the offences punishable under Sections- 354,306/34 of the Indian Penal Code, this Court had expected that the trial of the petitioner could be concluded within a period of one year. Such trial having been not concluded in a time span of one year when the petitioner had moved again the trial Court for grant of bail, it had by an order dated 25.11.2010 while rejecting the prayer for bail did not give any reason for not concluding the trial in the prescribed period of one week. Subsequently when a report was 2 called for from this Court, the trial Court in its report dated 18.04.2011 had sought four months time for concluding the trial, by explaining that six of the twelve prosecution witnesses had already been examined. Seeing the aforementioned report and the time span of four months, this Court by order dated 17.05.2011 had adjourned the case to 24.08.2011 with a hope that the period of four months as indicated in the report of the trial Court dated 18.04.2011 would be sufficient for concluding the trial. Counsel for the petitioner submits that though after 18.04.2011, three more witnesses have been examined but then neither the informant nor the Investigating Officer have been examined till date and that in any event the trial of the petitioner has not been concluded till date. As noted above there is no representation on behalf of the State nor any further explanation has been given by the trial Court as with 3 regard to the compliance of the order of this Court dated 17.05.2011. Considering all these aspects, this Court would direct for release of the petitioner, namely, Santosh Kumar on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Begusarai in connection with Sessions Trial No. 893 of 2009 arising out of Sahebpurkamal P.S Case No. 06 of 2009 under Sections- 354,306/34 of the Indian Penal Code, subject to the following three conditions:- (i) The two bail bonds will be furnished by the petitioner, one by a Government servant and the other by a close family relative. (ii) The petitioner will remain present in course of trial on each and every day and his absence even for a single day would automatically entail the consequences of cancellation of his 4 bail. (iii) The petitioner in case is now made accused in any other criminal case, that would itself lead to cancellation of his bail. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this application is disposed of. Ranjan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)