IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.41115 of 2009 Jitu Kumar Tanti @ Salman, Son of Ram Bilas Tanti, R/o Malda Gaispar, P.S. English Bazar, Distt. Malda (Bengal). ------- Petitoner Versus The State of Bihar ------ Opp. Party ----------- 2 1.12.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. The petitioner faces prosecution for an offence under Sections 328/379/411 of the Indian Penal Code and it is said that there was recovery of stolen article from his possession. Mr. Bhola Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner, however, with reference to the seizure list, would try to explain that there is no recovery from the conscious possession of the petitioner and his complicity has only emerged because he was earlier also made accused in a few criminal cases of the similar nature. Considering the fact that the petitioner’s involvement in this case is more or less based on his earlier past chequered history as also is sought to be based on inculpatory extra judicial confession, this Court would not be inclined to grant bail to 2 the petitioner for the present till he would complete one year of his judicial custody. Since the petitioner is in custody since 13.9.2009, he may renew his prayer for bail after September, 2010 initially before the trial court which must make its endeavor to complete the trial itself in the aforementioned period. If for any reason the trial of the petitioner would not be completed by September, 2010, the petitioner would initially move the trial court which would be under obligation to record the reasons for not concluding the trial whereafter only the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail before this Court. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)