IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.26939 of 2008 MAHESH KUMAR @ MAHESH PRASAD Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2/ 17.07.2008 Heard. The prayers for bail of the petitioner were twice rejected earlier. Lastly by Annexure-1 on 20th December, 2007. The facts of the case and the circumstances have been fully discussed in the first order dated 8.5.2007 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 11882 of 2007. The contention is two fold that in spite of being in custody the petitioner is not getting trial and that police is probably charting out a plan, so as to further delay the trial proceedings. It is contended in this connection that the police has woven out a theory that the full brother of the petitioner, who happens to be the husband of the deceased and who had purchased a policy of LIC jointly with the deceased, for taking benefits of LIC policy killed her and as such the police has approached for issuance of warrant of arrest non-bailable against the husband of the deceased. The third contention is that why the petitioner would kill the lady with whom the petitioner did not have any interest. The submission was that the court should again peruse the case diary and re-appraise the fact, so as to passing a fresh order. After having perused Annexure-1, I do not think it proper and necessary to go into the factual matrix of the case over and again. The order appears passed under the full merits of the facts. As regards the contention other than the facts, I direct the Sessions Judge, Biharsarif to make over the case, which has reportedly been committed to him for trial to the Additional Sessions Judge, Hilsa, who could take up the trial on priority basis and conclude it within a period of one and half years from the date of framing of the charges. It must not be understood that the charges should be framed with any amount of delay. It must be done as quickly as possible. DKS/ (Dharnidhar Jha,J)