IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.41261 of 2008 MAKHAN LAL @ MAKHAN LALA Versus STATE OF BIHAR - - - - 2. 23.9.2008 None appears on behalf of the petitioner. I have heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor and perused the record. The earlier prayer of the petitioner was dismissed by this court and he renewed his prayer in the court below also and thereafter has preferred the present petition. The recovery is of 2 K.Gs. of ganja from the possession of the petitioner which the petitioner was attempting to import into India from across the Nepalese border. It was categorically submitted in the court below that in spite of charge being framed on 20.6.2007 only one witness was examined by 5.8.2008 and the petitioner was lodged in custody. The learned Judge who dismissed the prayer for bail of the petitioner did not even care to take notice of that submission and to point out as to why he could not get any witness produced before him. The approach of 2 the learned Judge could indicate as to how sensitive he could be to an accused who is in custody since 27.5.2007 and is not getting the quick disposal of the case. The learned Judge is directed to conclude the case in six months time, else, the petitioner shall be approaching him with a fresh prayer for bail. The time shall be counted from the date of production/receipt of a copy of the present order. The petition is dismissed. Kanth ( Dharnidhar Jha, J.)