AMARESHWAR SAHAY,J.

( 1 ) HEARD the parties.

( 2 ) THE petitioner is facing trial for commission of the offences under Sections 419, 420, 386 and 387, I. P. C. There is no dispute of the fact that the prayer for bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected up to this court.

( 3 ) ADMITTEDLY till 13-7-2004, five prosecution witnesses have already been examined during the trial.

( 4 ) IT appears that the petitioner, filed a fresh application for bail before the trial court on 18-8-2004, only on the ground that sixty days has already expired from the first date fixed for evidence i. e. 8-6-2004 and the trial has not yet concluded and, as such, under the provisions of Section 437 (6) of the code of Criminal Procedure, he was entitled to be released on bail. The learned Magistrate by order dated 18-8-2004, itself rejected the petition for bail filed by the petitioner under Section 437 (6) of the Cr. P. C. for the reasons that only five witnesses have been examined till date and the other important charge-sheet witnesses, namely, Dr. Lina Priya, Dr. Manjit Singh, Dr. Ashok kumar Gupta and some other witnesses from whom the petitioner had demanded huge amount by way of ransom ha