IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.11996 of 2011 SURENDRA YADAV @ Surendra Singh @ Surendra Gope son of Sri Ram Bilash Yadav, resident of village- Varuna, P.S.-Fatuha, Dist.- Patna Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 6.4.2011. Heard Mr. Akhileshwar Prasad Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A.M.P. Mehta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor. This is the third attempt for grant of bail. Learned senior counsel, while pressing the bail petition, has argued that the petitioner has remained in jail for about nineteen months and there was no cogent material on record against the petitioner. It was further submitted that in this case charge was framed on 4.6.2010 and till date only two prosecution witnesses have been examined. On these grounds, learned counsel prays that the petitioner may be granted bail. Since prayer for bail of the petitioner was already rejected on merit, there is no point to re-consider the case on merit. So far as period of custody is concerned the court is of the opinion that it cannot be termed as changed circumstance for filing subsequent bail petition. However, the fact remains that in this case charge was framed on 4.6.2010 and till date only two prosecution witnesses have been examined. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the court is not inclined to extend the privilege of bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for bail stands rejected. However, keeping in view the period of custody, it is 2 desirable to direct the court below to expedite the trial so that the case may come to its logical end without unnecessary delay. Md.S. ( Rakesh Kumar, J.)