IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.23151 of 2008 DHIRAJ SINGH @ DHIRAJ KUMAR SINGH Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3. 12.8.2008 Heard. The theft property was recovered from the petitioner’s possession while he was moving on the same motorcycle which was the subject matter of theft. The contention is that subsequent recovery was made on the basis of confession of the petitioner before the police and that is of no consequence and that, for recovery of the motorcycle a case under Section 414 IPC was registered and the petitioner is on bail in that case. The third contention is that the petitioner has remained in custody for more than a year. The prosecution does not have a case that the recovery of the motorcycle was consequent upon the confession of any accused including this petitioner. As such, the argument appears of no consequence. The petitioner appears moving with the evidence of theft which he committed. Considering the circumstances, the prayer is dismissed. However, this court expects that the case is in trial and that has to be completed in another six months time, else the court below shall itself release the petitioner on bail. B.Kr. ( Dharnidhar Jha, J. )