IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.12713 of 2009 RAJESH PANDEY, son of Nandu Pandey, Resident of village Sonbarsa, P.S. Kanti, District Muzaffarpur Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 02/ 15.05.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner is an accused in a case under Sections 394, 302, 411 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, which was registered against unknown. He has been implicated during the investigation on the statement of co- accused, Braj Kishore Mahto, but from his custody Rs. One lac part of the robbed amount was recovered with the label and seal of the firm, wherefrom the amount was being taken to the bank. In view of the recovery of the amount with the label and seal of the firm, I am not inclined to admit the petitioner to the privilege of bail even though his antecedent is stated to be clean. This application is, accordingly, dismissed. Petitioner has completed one year in jail custody. In the circumstances, prosecution agency is directed to produce the witnesses and the trial court is directed to conclude the trial of the petitioner within nine months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. It appears from the prayer portion that the case has not yet been committed to the court of Sessions, but the counsel for the petitioner submitted that during the pendency of this 2 application, case has already been committed to the court of Sessions. Let a copy of this order be forwarded to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur in connection with Kazimohammadpur P.S. Case No. 72 of 2008, who should forward the same to the court concerned with a note that the trial has to be completed within nine months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order. Let this order be communicated to the court below through fax on payment of usual charges by the petitioner. Arjun/ ( V.N. Sinha, J.)