IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.2171 of 2011 PAPPU YADAV, SON OF PARMESHWAR YADAV Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 02 04.03.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Petitioner seeks his bail in connection with Gogri P.S. Case No. 224 of 2007 registered under Sections 449, 302, 201, 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act. There is specific allegation of committing murder of the informant’s husband against the petitioner. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that having similar allegation co-accused Shambhu Yadav has already been granted privilege of bail by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 12.10.2010 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 36795 of 2010 and furthermore, almost all the prosecution witnesses including the informant have already declared hostile in course of trial but I am not, at all, convinced with the above stated submission. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner stands rejected. However, learned Sessions Judge, Khagaria is directed to conclude the trial of the petitioner preferably within three months from the date of receipt of this order and if the trial of the petitioner is not concluded within the above stated period, he may renew his prayer for bail before the learned Sessions Judge itself. Shahzad ( Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J.)