IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.42988 of 2010 USHA DEVI, W/O BISHUNDEO MAHTO, R/O VILLAGE: CHANAUN, P.S. RUPAOU, DISTRICT NAWADA. ……………………………PETITIONER. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR. ……………………………OPPOSITE PARTY. ----------- 03/ 20.04.2011 Having heard Mr. Shakil Ahmad Khan, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State and taking into account that the trial of the petitioner could not be concluded, only because of the co- accused brought into the ambit of trial under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were not appearing before the Court on account of pendency of their anticipatory bail application before this Court and that they have been ultimately granted such anticipatory bail, this Court would reject the prayer for bail of the petitioner by directing the trial Court to ensure that the trial of the petitioner and other co-accused persons should be completed within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The trial Court must keep in mind that the other co-accused persons are under an obligation to remain present in course of trial and have to suffer the consequences for not remaining present for not doing so. Thus the petitioner should not be made to suffer in the completion of the trial on account of any evasive tactics of other co accused persons enlarged on bail. It however goes without saying that if the trial of the petitioner is not completed within a period of aforesaid six months it will be open for the petitioner to move this Court for renewing her prayer for bail in this case. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. Ranjan (Mihir Kumar Jha,J)