IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.9142 of 2009 RAMASHISH MAHTO Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 8.4.2009 Heard Sri Tarakant Jha, appearing on behalf of the petitioner Ramashish Mahto whose earlier petition of similar nature was dismissed vide Cr.Misc.Petition No.13107 of 2008. The sole ground for renewing the prayer for pendency of the trial and the petitioner is in custody since 25.6.2007. I have perused the rejection order passed by the learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Hilsa in B.P.No.563 of 2008 and I find that the learned Judge has not given any reason except that the earlier prayer of the petitioner was dismissed by this Court was reason for not being inclined in reconsidering his earlier prayer. Might be that the learned Judge could have felt divested of jurisdiction on account of prayer for bail of rejecting by superior court but was not it within the purview of propriety that the learned Judge should have indicated his efforts made towards the conclusion of the trial and the reasons for not achieving the target. Dismissing the prayer for bail by taking resort - 2 - to an order of rejection passed by this Court may be safer for the Judges but not a good ground to be appreciated at least by me. At any rate, considering the nature of allegation and the support it gets which is indicated in my earlier rejection order, I am not inclined to direct the release of the above named petitioner on bail. Petition is again dismissed. However, I could direct the trial Judge to ensure that the trial takes off. If it has not taken off, then the case has to be given priority in the scheme of trial by the Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Hilsa, Nalanda. B.Kr. ( Dharnidhar Jha, J. )