IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.27660 of 2011 Natto Yadav @ Nattu Yadav son of Late Garib Lal Yadav Versus The State Of Bihar ---------------------------------- 3. 24.11.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner was refused bail by orders dated 15.12.2009 and 19.8.2010 since he was one of the two assailants. The prayer for bail has been renewed on the ground that even though the charges were framed on 30.9.2010 the witnesses were not examined for a considerably long period. An explanation was called for from the Trial Court which reveals that on 30.9.2010 charge was framed whereafter on 13.1.2011 the summons were issued for appearing of the witnesses and on 13.4.2011 and 2.7.2011 bailable and non bailable warrants were issued for their appearance whereafter on 7.9.2011 and 8.9.2011, three witnesses were examined, Considering that now at least the witnesses have been examined, I am not inclined to review the earlier orders. The prayer for bail is once again rejected. The explanation of the Trial Court is that there has been no delay in examination of witnesses but I am not in agreement with him and in my view, the fact that the witnesses were first summoned after almost four months of the framing 2 of charge is itself a delay in issuing summons. Moreover, I find that the Trial Court has directed the Superintendent of Police to produce 8 witnesses on 20.10.2011 without considering that it would be impossible to examine all the eight witnesses on the same date. He should have instead fixed one date for examination of each witness which would be realistic. S.Ali ( Anjana Prakash, J.)