IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.40577 of 2007 HARENDRA RAI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 10. 06.08.2008 Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and the learned Counsel for the opposite party no. 2. The materials on which this application for cancellation of the bail of opposite party no. 2 is based are events which transpired leading to the institution of CR.W.J.C. No. 717 of 2006 before this Court by the present petitioner. At that stage the petitioner did not chose to seek cancellation of the bail of opposite party no. 2 despite the fact that the writ court was satisfied on facts that the case required transfer to Patna. To now urge the same grounds for purposes of cancellation in a separate fresh application when the trial has been transferred to Patna ands no further allegations have been made of abuse of the privilege of bail after such transfer, this Court is not persuaded at the request of the petitioner to resurrect the event of the criminal writ application to cancel the bail now. To that extent the Court declines to entertain this application for cancellation. Nonetheless, the petitioner shall not be precluded from his remedies in the event that fresh circumstances are urged after transfer of the case to Patna of misuse of the privilege of bail. This Court also considers it proper to record the submissions of Sri Vindhyachal Singh, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 that he shall adequately cooperate for an early disposal of the trial. That he shall be properly represented on each date including his physical appearance on all such dates that the Court below shall so direct for the purposes of expeditious trial and in the event of failure to do so the court below shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law notwithstanding that this Court may have declined to interfere in this present application for cancellation. This application is dismissed. Snkumar/- (Navin Sinha,J.)