IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.8115 of 2011 AMIR CHAND SINGH @ MAGHI SINGH Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 20.06.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the state. Earlier prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected by this court vide order dated 25.08.2010 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 18325 of 2010 but this second bail petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner on the ground that some important facts could not be placed before this court at the time of hearing of above-said Criminal Misc. No. 18325 of 2010. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per prosecution case, the alleged occurrence took place when the deceased and the other persons had assembled for a Panchayat. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that when the place of occurrence was visited by the I.O. he did not find any sign of firing and he also noticed that the place of occurrence was not spacious for holding Panchayat and, therefore, the entire prosecution story falls on the ground. It is also contended by him that as a matter of fact, the prosecution party was aggressor and it is not clear as to who committed murder of the deceased. Taking into consideration the above-said submissions as well as facts and circumstances of the case, I do not feel it proper to release the petitioner on bail. 2 Accordingly, prayer for bail of the petitioner in connection with Sessions Trial No. 270 of 2010 arising out of Suryapura P.S. Case No. 48 of 2009 stands rejected. As the petitioner is in custody since 13.11.2009, the learned Fast Track Court No.-II, Rohtas is directed to conclude the trial of the petitioner within nine months from, the date of receipt of the order and if the trial of the petitioner is not concluded within the above-said period on account of laches of the prosecution, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail. AKV/- ( Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J.)