Judgment ( 1. ) ASJ, (F. T. C.), Amarpatan in S. T. No. 70/02 vide impugned judgment dated 23-1-03 recording conviction of appellant under Section 395/397, IPC sentenced him to undergo RI for a period of seven years. Being aggrieved, appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 374 (2) Cr. PC. ( 2. ) ON 19-1-01 at about 3. 45 P. M. , five masked persons armed with fire arm Katta-sword entered into Allahabad Bank Branch Maryadpur. Shiv Nath Bhubharkar, the Manager and Kailash Chand Yadav the peon of the Bank were present. These five masked persons asked them to hand over the cash of the Bank. Being resisted using fire arm katta-sword the dacoits inflicted injuries to Shiv Nath Bhubharkar and Kailash Chandra Yadav. Thereafter the dacoits taking Rs. 58,228. 70 and Rs. 2,72,000. 00 respectively from counter and safe ran away. One of the dacoits appellant Janardhan Dwivedi was apprehended by the villagers. In his statement under Section 27 of Evidence Act appellant disclosed the names of other four dacoits and led to the recovery of cash Rs. l. ,25,000/-and a sword. Completing the investigation, appellant was charge-sheeted. Appellant abjured the guilt. However, the Court below vide impugned judgment recording conviction under Section 395/397, IPC sentenced him to undergo RI for a period of seven years. ( 3. ) THE conviction-sentence vide impugned judgment has been assailed mainly on the ground that the prosecution has not examined the Branch Manager and the investigating Officer, As such, the Court below erred in recording the conviction under Section 395/397, IPC. ( 4. ) THE case of the prosecution against the appellant was sought to be proved on the basis of memorandum (Ex. P-2) and the recovery of cash-sword vide memo (Ex. P-5 ). In the written report (Ex. P-3) Shivnath Bhubharkar has stated the names of dacoits. In S. T. No. 70/02 without examining the witnesses aforesaid the Court below vide order dated 30-12-02 closed the case of the prosecution. In a case of dacoity the Court below was required to be strict enough to take action for not producing the witnesses. Instead vide order sheet dated 30-12-02 it opted to close the case of the prosecution. In S. T. No. 70/02 without examining the witnesses aforesaid the Court below vide order dated 30-12-02 closed the case of the prosecution. In a case of dacoity the Court below was required to be strict enough to take action for not producing the witnesses. Instead vide order sheet dated 30-12-02 it opted to close the case of the prosecution. On behalf of appellant it has been contended that in the event of examination of witnesses Shivnath Bhubharkar and Investigating Officer it would have been possible for him to bring the fact of his innocence to the light Where the Court below said to have proceeded under Section 299, Cr. PC against other absconding accused persons it ought to have recorded statements of all witnesses cited as per list enclosed with the Challan. On facts and in the circumstances of the case, the trial being not held properly, grievance of the appellant against conviction sentence vide impugned judgment seems to be reasonable. ( 5. ) CONSEQUENTLY, the appeal is allowed. Setting aside the conviction-sentence vide impugned judgment the case is remanded to the Sessions Judge, Satna to proceed as under : (1) Sessions Judge, Satna himself shall try the S. T. No. 70/02. As far as possible, the trial must be concluded by 31-12-05. (2) Superintendent of Police, Satna shall depute an officer of the rank of Dy. Superintendent of Police to produce the witnesses before the Sessions Judge on date/dates. He shall be held responsible for non-production of witnesses. (3) The Dy. Superintendent of Police Incharge may obtain summons/bailable warrants against the remaining witnesses proposed for examination. Registrar (Judicial) shall transmit immediately the record of S. T. No. 70/02 per Special Messenger and direct the Superintendent Jail concerned to produce the appellant before the Sessions Judge, Satna on 29-8-05 .