IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.51806 of 2008 SANJAY CHAUDHARY … … Petitioner Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR … … Opp. Party For the petitioner: Shri Nachiketa Jha For the State: Shri Dashrath Mehta, APP ----------- 2. 18.12.2008 Heard. The petitioner has approached this Court with a fresh prayer for bail having failed on two occasions earlier. The last prayer was dismissed with a direction to the petitioner to renew before the lower court. The lower court has noted down that all the witnesses, eight in number, have been examined and the I.O. is only to be examined for whose examination summons and warrant of arrest have been issued and the Superintendent of Police has also been informed by the court. The contention was that there was no identification of the petitioner but on production of the evidence recorded of P.W. 1 Sunil Kumar Pathak who is stated to be the son of the lady informant and the lady herself who has been examined as P.W. 6, I 2 find that both of them have identified the petitioner. It is true that the other six persons have turned hostile and have not stated anything about the incident. Considering that the trial is likely to be concluded, I am not inclined to direct the release of the petitioner on bail. I may direct the trial court to ensure that the trial is concluded by the end of February, 2009 by delivering the judgment. The petition is dismissed. Kanth ( Dharnidhar Jha,J.)