IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.3300 of 2011 Mutur Roy Son of Arjun Roy Versus The State Of Bihar ----------- 3. 25.7.2011 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner seeks bail in Rajpur P.S.case No.55 of 2008 (S. Tr. No.128 of 2009) instituted for the offence u/s.302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act. The petitioner was refused bail by orders dated 25.11.2009 and 7.7.2010 respectively vide Cr.Misc.No.40220 of 2009 and Cr.Misc.No.21164 of 2010 since there was an allegation against him that he had fired on the head of the deceased as well as since the victim had named the present petitioner. A report was called for from the Trial Court since the petitioner has renewed his prayer for bail on the ground that no sufficient progress is made during trial. The Trial Court has informed that four witnesses have been examined during trial and the rest of the witnesses are not produced by the prosecuting agency and he has expressed his frustration in proceeding with the trial on account of non-cooperative attitude of the prosecuting agency. Let this report of the Trial Court (Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C. 3rd, Buxar) be forwarded to the S.P., Buxar. The Trial Court is also directed to send a list of the witnesses fixing - 2 - specific dates for production of the witnesses along with a copy of this order to the S.P., Buxar and the S.P., Buxar is directed to ensure production of the witnesses on the date so fixed by the Trial Court so that there is no further delay in trial. If the S.P., Buxar finds that such police officers are purposely evading their production as a witness during trial, he shall strict measures against the officers concerned. In view of such, I am not inclined to review the earlier order. The prayer for bail is once again rejected. Narendra/ ( Anjana Prakash, J. )