IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.28158 of 2010 BIRENDRA RAI @ BIJALI RAI, S/O- ANUP RAI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 11.08.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. No body appears on behalf of the State. This case depicts a sorry state of affairs. Petitioner is facing charge punishable under Sections 302/34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act in respect of an occurrence that had taken place on 5.12.1996. He was taken into custody on the same date. Petitioner moved this Court for bail in the year 2002 which was dismissed by order dated 10.10.2002 (Annexure- 1) with an observation that the trial will be disposed of within nine months from the date of receipt/communication of a copy of this order failing which the petitioner will be at liberty to renew prayer. As the trial did not proceed further, the petitioner again moved this Court for bail which was considered and rejected by order dated 29.1.2007 (Annexure-1/a). It was observed therein that if the trial is not concluded within six months, he may renew his prayer for bail. The trial continued to proceed on snail’s speed which prompted the petitioner once again to approach this Court for bail. The said matter was considered and disposed of by order dated 31.8.2009 (Annexure- 1/b). The said application was disposed of with an observation that the trial court shall take up the matter on priority basis and examine all prosecution witnesses within six months failing which 2 the petitioner was granted liberty to renew prayer. Petitioner has thus once again approach this Court seeking bail. It is stated that prior to passing of the order dated 31.8.2009 (Annexure-1/b), two witnesses were examined and both of them were declared hostile. Mr. Surendra Kishore Thakur, learned counsel states that he is in possession of the entire order-sheet which would demonstrate that after 31.8.2009 not a single witness has been examined in this case. It is submitted that in spite of several indulgences granted by this Court, the trial has not made substantial progress as a result whereof, the petitioner continues to incarcerate for nearly 13 years by now. This Court in the circumstances can only grant him bail. Let petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Shri Anup Kumar Verma Addl. Sessions Judge-III, Barh, Patna. in connection with Sessions Trial No. 362 of 1997 (arising out of Barh P.S. case no. 407 of 1996 subject to the following conditions: (i) One of the bailers will be own/close family member of the petitioner. (ii) The petitioner shall appear in person on each and every date fixed in the Court 3 below. In case of default on two consecutive occasions without any cogent/satisfactory reason, the bail bond of the petitioner shall be cancelled and thereafter the Trial Court will be at liberty to secure his arrest in accordance with law. pkj ( Kishore K. Mandal, J. )