IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.21591 of 2009 MD.SAFID Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 08.07.2009 Heard both sides. Petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted under diverse sections of the Penal Code including Sections 302/34 of the I.P.C. and 27 of the Arms Act. As per the allegation in the F.I.R. the petitioner is said to have entered into the house along with some other accused persons and fired at the deceased causing death. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in course of trial six(06) P.Ws have been examined till date. P.W.3 is the informant whereas P.W.1 is the daughter of the informant, who, according to the F.I.R., is the eye witness to the occurrence. Referring to their depositions it is contended that there is apparent inconsistencies / contradictions in their depositions. It is contended that petitioner is in custody since 8.1.2008. It is further contended that other co-accused person (not named in the F.I.R.) has been granted bail. 2 This Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. However, having regard to the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 8.01.2008 and that trial is already under way, this Court observes that the trial Court shall make all endeavours to conclude the trial itself by examining all the witnesses on behalf of the prosecution within three months from the date of receipt/communication of this order failing which the petitioner is granted liberty to renew the prayer for bail. Bibhash (Kishore K. Mandal, J.)