IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.27020 of 2009 SANJAR EQWAL @ PAPPU Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 02 18.08.2009 Heard both sides. Petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted under Sections 341, 323, 504 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegation is that outside the Cinema Hall the petitioner called the informant and thereafter he shot from his gun, causing injury in the abdomen. Learned counsel submits that he is in custody since 24.3.2007. Impugned order reflects that the trial of the case was taken up, but after framing of charge-sheet only one witness could be examined on behalf of the prosecution. Learned counsel states that till today no further progress has been made in the trial. Looking to the allegation and also the period of his custody, this Court while declining his prayer for bail directs/observes as under:- Let the trial court made all endeavor to examine all the prosecution witnesses on or before 14th of December, 2009, failing which the trial court shall enlarge the petitioner on bail on furnishing 2 bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Session Judge- VI, Gaya in connection with Kotwali P.S. Case No. 102 of 2003, S.Tr. No. 254 of 2009, subject to the following conditions:- I. One of the bailors should be the own/close family member of the petitioner. II. Petitioner shall appear before the court below in person on each date fixed at the trial. In case, of default in such appearance on two consecutive dates, it shall be open to the trial court to cancel his bail bond and secure his arrest in accordance with law. P.K. (K. K. Mandal, J.)