IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.28350 of 2008 RAM CHANDRA MAHTO, son of Late Duryodhan Mahto, village Sikta Belwa, PS Ram Nagar, Dist. West Champaran – Petitioner. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 20.6.2011 The petitioner has challenged the order taking cognizance, dated 17.3.2007 under sections 392, 411 and 216(A) of the Penal Code on the ground that there is no legal evidence against the petitioner that he had participated in the alleged crime. It has been submitted that four unknown persons had committed the crime. It is stated that the petitioner was a Junior Engineer posted in Uttar Pradesh and as such his name has been dragged in this case without there being any material to support the fact. The question as to whether the petitioner was working in Uttar Pradesh at the relevant time can only be considered after producing proper evidence in this regard. I, therefore, cannot interfere with the order taking cognizance. This application is dismissed. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to produce the documents and all materials to show that he was working as a Junior Engineer in Uttar Pradesh at the relevant time. I further direct that the trial may be taken up on priority basis as the petitioner is being deprived of his pension due to pendency of this case. The petitioner is given liberty to produce a copy of this order before the court concerned within three weeks. haque ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)