IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.27012 of 2010 THARU HAWARI son of Bismillah Hawari @ Bismillah Mian, resident of Village Sahadewa, Police Station Raxaul, District East Champaran, … Petitioner Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR… Opposite Party For the Petitioner: Mr. Rama Kant Yadav, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Pushpa Sinha No. 2, APP ----------- 3 15.09.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for offences under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that from the allegation as set up in the first information report it appears that the occurrence had taken place at 12.00 noon and thus, it is highly improbable that any person had not seen the occurrence. It is stated that the first information report has been lodged due to enmity between the father of the petitioner as well as the father of the minor victim girl. The petitioner is stated to be in custody since 06.07.2009. I have perused the report of the trial court, wherein it has been stated that four witnesses out of nine chargesheeted witnesses have already been examined till 2 16.06.2010. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that four witnesses have been examined during the course of trial and none of them has supported the case of the prosecution Learned counsel for the State submits that the petitioner’s prayer for bail has already been rejected on 05.11.2009 after consideration of the materials on record including the statement of the minor victim girl recorded under section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter to be referred to as “the Code”), wherein the girl has fully supported the case of rape committed on her by the petitioner and the first information report had also been lodged by the victim girl herself, who was a minor girl of 14 years. It is further submitted that none of the family members or the victim girl herself has been examined during the course of trial rather only the villagers or other persons have been examined. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the girl herself has stated in her statement recorded under section 164 of the Code that the petitioner has committed rape on her, I am not inclined to grant bail to this petitioner, who is facing trial for the 3 allegation of committing rape upon a minor girl. Accordingly, this application is dismissed. However, since four witnesses out of nine witnesses have already been examined till 16.06.2010, it is expected from the trial court to take steps for expeditious disposal of the trial preferably within six months. It is also expected from the Superintendent of Police, East Champaran to ensure that the prosecution witnesses are produced on the date fixed by the trial court. Let a copy of this order be handed over to the learned counsel for the State. It is made clear that the trial court shall conclude the trial in accordance with law on its own merit without being prejudiced by any observation made or finding recorded in this order. SC ( Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)