IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.41354 of 2009 DILIP SAO, son of Janki Sao, resident of Mohalla Dhaniya Bagicha, P.S. Delha, District Gaya Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3. 14.12.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the State. This is a case of misuse of privilege of bail. The petitioner facing prosecution for offence u/s 25, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act, even when he was granted bail earlier, had remained absconding for a period over 6½ years, inasmuch as when the case was fixed for recording his statement u/s 313 Cr.P.C. on 5.1.2003 he became absent and when his prayer for being represented through a counsel was rejected on that day, he did not care to even remain present on the next dates of the trial. Consequently this Court would find that the court below has rightly rejected the prayer for bail of the petitioner but at the same time as the petitioner’s trial had progressed to a considerable length and in fact got abruptly halted only on account of petitioner not remaining present at the stage of recording of his statement u/s 313 2 Cr.P.C. this Court would direct the court below to conclude the trial of the petitioner itself within a period of three months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. If the trial of the petitioner for the laches on the part of the prosecution would not be completed in the aforesaid period of three months, the petitioner would be released on bail with a condition that he will remain present in course of trial on day to day basis. It is also made clear that the trial of the petitioner which looks to have already been segregated on account of other co-accused persons absconding would not now be clubbed so as to delay further the trial of the petitioner. With the aforementioned observation, this application is dismissed. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/