IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No. 8991 of 2011 Akash Kumar, S/o Late Raishno Sharma. Versus The State of Bihar ------------------- 06. 28.11.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State, Mr. Gauri Shankar Gupta, APP. The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted for the offences under Sections 304B and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner was refused bail by orders dated 29.03.2010 and 13.09.2010 but the petitioner has renewed his prayer for bail after having remained in custody for about three years and on the ground of undue delay in trial. A report was called for from the Trial Court for reasons of delay in trial. Perusal of it revealed that it was the mother of the petitioner who had delayed the trial. Thereafter the said Sheela Devi and co-accused Lav Kush Singh appeared before the Court and filed discharge petition which was rejected on 06.09.2011 charges under Sections 304B and 201/34 IPC have been framed against the accused persons. The reason for delay is accordingly attributed to the accused persons who happen to be the close family members of the petitioner. In view of such, I am not inclined to review the earlier orders. The prayer for bail is once again rejected. 2 The Trial Court is directed to send a list of witnesses fixing specific dates to the S.P. concerned along with the copy of this order who will ensure the attendance of the witnesses on the said dates so that there is no further delay in trial. Vikash/- (Anjana Prakash, J.)