IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.12534 of 2009 SAWAN KUMAR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 04 12.08.2009 Heard both sides. Petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act. Initially the F.I.R. was lodged by the son of the victim against three unknown accused persons. In course of investigation witnesses including the daughter of the deceased, grand-father of the informant and few other witnesses have supported the allegation that the petitioner along with two others was involved in commission of the occurrence. Learned counsel submits that Sonu Kumar, who is admittedly the employee of the deceased was following her when she was fired at by the accused persons in order to rob her. It is contended that he has not supported the implication of the petitioner in the occurrence. It is contended that he is in jail custody since 14.7.2007 and there is no criminal antecedents against the petitioner. 2 Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant submits that the trial is under way, in which several witnesses have already been examined, who have constantly supported the prosecution case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are eight witnesses cited in the charge- sheet out of whom only 3-4 witnesses have been examined. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not persuaded to admit him on bail. The prayer for bail is accordingly, rejected. Looking to the submission advanced on behalf of the petitioner as also the fact that he is in custody since 14.7.2007, this Court observes that let, the trial court make endeavor to examine all the remaining prosecution witnesses within seven month from the date of receipt/communication of a copy of this order in the court below, the petitioner shall have liberty to renew his prayer for bail before this Court. P.K. (K.K. Mandal, J.)