IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.12858 of 2011 Amarnath Deep Versus The State Of Bihar Through C.B.I. ----------- 3. 20.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the C.B.I. Renewing the prayer for bail in a Police Case under Sections 302, 120B and 34 of the Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act it is submitted that the petitioner is in custody for approximately seven years. His name had transpired on confession of co-accused Rajan Tiwary. As per instruction up till now 7 witnesses have been examined out of approximately 100. Opposing the prayer counsel for the C.B.I. submits that co-accused Rajan Tiwary has been convicted. It is further submitted that approximately 13 prosecution witnesses have been examined. P.W.s 2 and 4 has specifically named the petitioner as one of the persons possessing light fire arms and from which he is stated to have fired at the deceased. Submitting that the P.W.s 2 and 4 have named the accused as Amar Yadav, he submits that it is none other than the petitioner and for which he relies on the materials noticed in the impugned order of rejection dated 5.12.2005 of the Court below 2 including from Cr.W.J.C. No. 287 of 2005. In the nature of the allegations, identification by the informant in the T.I.P. noticed in the earlier order of rejection and the fact that the three persons had been killed, to this Court the period of custody is not very relevant. It is not in controversy at the Bar that the Supreme Court has already given certain directions for expediting the trial. The application is dismissed. P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)