IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.20610 of 2009 RAM KUMAR YADAV Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 04 07.09.2009 Heard both sides. Sole petitioner has approached this court seeking bail in a case instituted under Sections 392 and 411 of the Penal Code. Allegation as per F.I.R. is that while the informant was returning from bank after withdrawing a sum of Rs. two lacs one motorcycle over took him. He was stopped and the bag containing the amount was snatched. Accused persons robbed away with the bag. A chase was offered. One accused person along with motorcycle was apprehended. The companion accuseds, however, managed to escape. Petitioner is the person who was arrested with the motorcycle and the stolen bags. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the seizure list witnesses are not independent witnesses and they are not of the area where recovery is said to have been made. Be that as it may, having regard to the allegations appearing from the F.I.R. as also from the impugned order, this court is not inclined to extend the privilege of bail to the petitioner. Prayer for bail is, accordingly, rejected. It is next contended that he is in custody since 01.02.2009. In that view of the matter, this court observes that if 2 the trial of the case is not taken up within 10 months from the date of receipt/communication of a copy of this order in the court below, petitioner shall have liberty to renew prayer for bail. Sym/ (Kishore K. Mandal, J.)