IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.31319 of 2009 Anil Thakur, Son of late Vakil Thakur, Resident of Village Jadhua, P.S. Town Hajipur, Distt. Vaishali. -------- Petitioner Versus The State of Bihar ------ Opp. Party ----------- 4 27.11.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State. The petitioner, though not named in the First Information Report, has been made accused on the basis of subsequent materials collected in course of investigation and now stands to face trial for an offence under Sections 395/397/412 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the other co-accused persons having identical allegations have been released on bail and in this context, he would refer to Annexure Nos. 2 & 3 respectively annexed in this bail applications being orders dated 20.5.2005 in Cr. Misc. No. 16518 of 2005 and 2.8.2005 in Cr. Misc. No. 22996 of 2005 respectively. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, is not in a position to explain as to why the petitioner had remained absconding for a period of over four years even when his name had surfaced in course of investigation way back in the year 2004 itself. That would mean that the petitioner was absconding for a period over four years and in that view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, namely, Anil Thakur for the present, inasmuch as, the orders relied by the counsel for the petitioner of aforesaid co- 2 accused persons would not apply in his case only on the ground that they were not absconders like the petitioner. The petitioner, however, is said to be languishing in judicial custody for a period of almost four and half months (i.e. w.e.f. 11.6.2009) and therefore, this Court would direct the trial court to ensure that the trial of the petitioner is concluded in next eight months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. If, however, the trial of the petitioner is not concluded for the deliberate laches on the part of the prosecution in the aforementioned period of eight months, the petitioner will have liberty to move initially the trial court which then would record reasons for not concluding the trial in the aforementioned period whereafter only, the petitioner may move before this Court with a prayer for bail. With the aforementioned observations, this application is disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)