IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.30104 of 2008 RAJU KUMAR, son of Santosh Prasad, resident of Mohalla Manpur Adda, P.S. Bunyadganj, District Gaya ….Petitioner Versus STATE OF BIHAR ……. Opposite party ----------- 05/ 23.12.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner is an accused in a case, which was initially registered for the offence under Section 366A of the Indian Penal Code in which after recovery of the girl with the petitioner and four others, even Sections 376 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code was added. Petitioner was arrested along with the victim girl at Kolkata and then on the basis of transit warrant was produced in the court below and remanded in the present case. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that other three who were arrested along with petitioner with the victim girl have since been admitted to the privilege of bail by another Bench of this Court. Such orders, in spite of repeated direction, have not been produced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, although the matter was adjourned on different occasion so as to enable him to produce the same. In the circumstances, I am not inclined to grant further time for producing such orders. As the petitioner was apprehended along with the victim girl at Kolkata and is alleged to have even raped the victim as is evident from her 164 Cr.P.C. statement, I am not inclined to admit him to the privilege of bail. This application is, accordingly, rejected. 2 Petitioner is in jail custody for one year and three months, but till date only commitment has been made, so submitted counsel for the petitioner. In the circumstances, trial court is directed to frame charges forthwith and thereafter proceed with the trial and conclude the same as early as possible, in any case within nine months from the date of framing of charge. Arjun/ (V.N. Sinha, J.)