IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.3211 of 2008 RAJ KUMAR YADAV, Son of Kauleshwar Yadav, Resident of village-Bhaurbar, P.S. Magadh University Both Gaya, Dist.-Gaya. Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3. 25.03.2009 The learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to make correction in para-2 of the supplementary affidavit dated 22.9.2008. He is permitted to do so. The correction was made in course of the day. Heard. The case is under Sections 147, 148, 149, 364, 302, 171(f) of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act. The bail prayer of this appellant was earlier rejected four times by this Court under Cr. Misc. Nos. 9533 of 2004, 32392 of 2004, 16602 of 2004 and 40991 of 2005 on the ground that the offence relates to an occurrence in which three persons were kidnapped and murdered. The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. but in T.I.P. he was identified by two witnesses as amongst the criminals who had kidnapped the victims. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 3.5.2001 and thus he has remained in custody for a period exceeding seven years and ten months. In the supplementary affidavit dated 22.9.2008 the petitioner has stated that there are 12 witnesses in the case, out of whom only two witnesses, namely, P.W.1 Nafasat Hussain Khan and P.W. 2 Sahadat Hussain Khan were examined by the trial court respectively on 20.2.2007 and 22.5.2008. But both of them were declared hostile and they did not - 2 - support the case of prosecution. It is also stated that no other witness has been examined in the case. The learned counsel says that the petitioner is in custody for seven years and ten months but the trial is lingering and there is no likelihood of the conclusion of the trial in near future. The learned counsel also submits that the petitioner had moved before the Hon’ble Supreme Court under S.L.A. (Crl.) No.10319 of 2006 vide order dated 9.10.2006 as passed in that S.L.A. (Annexure-1/A) the Hon’ble Supreme Court refused to entertain the petition under Article 13 of the Constitution of India but with liberty to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail before this Court. Thus considering the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and also that the petitioner is in custody for a period exceeding seven years and ten months but the trial has not been concluded and that only two witnesses have been examined by the trial court and these two witnesses have also turned hostile and they did not support the prosecution case, the petitioner, Raj Kumar Yadav is admitted to bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10, 000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional District and Sessions Judge, F.T.C. No.I, Gaya in Sessions Trial No.676 of 2007, arising out of Magadh University P.S. Case No.20 of 2001. (C.M. Prasad, J.) Ravi/-