IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.37356 of 2009 PANKAJ KUMAR SINGH @ PANKAJ SINGH, S/O RAM NARESH SINGH, R/O VILL.- DARIHARA BHUAUL, P.S.- DARIYAPUR, DISTT.- SARAN ……… PETITIONER Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ………… OPPOSITE PARTY. ----------- For the Petitioner:- Mr. Kanhaiya Prasad Singh, Sr. Advocate with Dr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate. For the State:- Mr. R.P.S. Singh, A.P.P. ----------- 3. 14.12.2009. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered under Section 302 I.P.C and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Perused the report sent by the Addl. Sessions Judge XI, Saran pursuant to the Court’s order dated 28.10.2009. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the ocular evidence is not supported by the post mortem report as the case set up in the first information report is that the petitioner has fired at Santosh Kumar while he was fleeing away, but the post mortem report goes to show that the wound caused by entry of bullet is on the chest, and not on the back of the deceased. However, after consideration of all the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court has already 2 rejected the prayer for bail of the petitioner vide Annexure-1. This time also I do not find any cogent ground or fresh reason for grant of bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for bail is rejected. In the result this application is dismissed. However, the concerned trial court has informed that five witnesses have already been examined in this case and the next date for adducing evidence on behalf of prosecution is on 14.12.2009 and the case is likely to be disposed of very soon. In that view of the matter, it is expected of the trial court concerned that it shall ensure expeditious disposal of the case. dk ( Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J. )