IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.29912 of 2010 RUSTAM KHAN Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 03 01.12.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned P.P. for the State. Earlier the petitioner was granted bail some time in the year 2002 but he was remained in custody in connection with another cases. Furthermore, it appears from the impugned order that he escaped from police custody and subsequently he was arrested in West Bengal in the year 2006. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that petitioner is languishing in jail custody for more than four years but learned P.P. for the state submits that petitioner is a notorious criminal and he carries history of several criminal cases. The learned trial court has reported that altogether six witnesses have already been examined in the case and only four charge sheeted witnesses are left to be examined. Furthermore, the learned court below reported that he may conclude the trial within four months. In view of the aforesaid report of learned Trial Judge I am not inclined to grant the privilege of bail to petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer for bail stands rejected. However, if the trial of the petitioner is not concluded within the period as disclosed by learned Trial Judge, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail before the learned court 2 below itself. Shahzad ( Hemant Kumar Srivastava, J.)