IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.38572 of 2009 VIJAY SINGH, s/o Late Sheo nandan Singh, Resident of village Darba, P.S. Bhadaur, District-Patna. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR . ----------- 3 2/4/2010 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. Prayer for bail of the petitioner was earlier considered in the order dated 13.11.2009 while calling for the case diary and the following order was passed:- “This Court would find that the petitioner is an accused for committing an offence under section 385/302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act with a direct allegation of the deceased being shot by the fatal gun-shot injury caused by the petitioner. That apart, the petitioner, though named in the First Information, has remained absconding for a period over eight years and therefore, while this Court would adjourn this matter for enabling the counsel for the petitioner to make the submission which can be appreciated more effectively in the light of the materials in case diary.” From the case diary nothing would emerge so as to dislodge the earlier tentative finding recorded by this Court. Additionally, this Court would find that recent tactics of getting the trial conduced in installment as in this case, has to be dealt with firmly with both hands specially when it is also apparent that the petitioner by remaining absconding was himself responsible for bifurcation of trial. That being so, as the petitioner is the main accused and had absconded for a period over eight years, that by itself would be enough for rejection of prayer for his bail. In that view of the matter, prayer for bail of the 2 petitioner is hereby rejected with a direction to the trial court that trial of the petitioner should be concluded expeditiously. It goes without saying that any observation made in the earlier order with regard to allegation against the petitioner was only tentative in nature which was gone into only for the purpose of bail and the trial court therefore will never be influenced by such observation inasmuch as the trial has to held and concluded on the evidence on record. With the aforementioned observation this application is dismissed. Abhay Kumar ( Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)