IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.5986 of 2011 RAJU KUMAR @ RAJU MAHTO Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 03/ 19.05.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Addl. P.P. for the State. Although petitioner is not named in the first information report but in test identification parade he was identified by the informant. Submission on behalf of the petitioner is that the aforesaid informant was examined in the court and he stated that he had identified the petitioner only on the basis of suspicion. Regard being had to the facts and circumstances as well as submissions of the parties, I do not think it proper to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, his prayer for bail in connection with Hilsa P.S. Case no. 229/2010 stands rejected. However, the trial court is directed to conclude the trial of the petitioner within six months from the date of receipt of this order and if the trial of the petitioner is not concluded within the above stated period, he may renew his prayer for bail. shahid (Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J)