Patna High Court
Taukir AhamadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was denied to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Taukir Ahamad, has been in custody since 17 January 2022 for alleged murder under Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, arising from Rosera Police Station Case No. 403 of 2021. He previously applied for bail, which was rejected by the High Court on 23 February 2023. Counsel argued that the trial was still pending, while the State contended that the petitioner’s involvement was established during investigation. The trial court report indicated that sixteen prosecution witnesses had been examined, statements under Section 313 CrPC recorded, and the case was awaiting final arguments. Considering the seriousness of the offence and the advanced stage of trial, the High Court refused the bail application and directed the trial court to expedite the proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a murder case (Sections 302 and 34 IPC) when the trial is at an advanced stage with prosecution evidence already recorded.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 313
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 34
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- Indian Penal Code
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Section 302
- Section 34
- Section 313
- high court
- trial delay
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81983 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-403 Year-2021 Thana- ROSERA District- Samastipur
======================================================
Taukir Ahamad Son of Noor Alalm @ Noor Aalalm @ Nur Alam R/o Village
- Udaipur, Police Station - Rosera, District - Samastipur... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pratik, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Madan Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 13-02-2026 Heard Mr.Pratik, learned counsel for the petitioner,
learned counsel for the informant and Mr.Madan Kumar, learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
17.01.2022 in connection with Rosera P.S. Case No. 403 of
2021, which gave rise to S.Tr.No.340/2022, CIS No.73/2022,
F.I.R. dated 16.12.2021 registered for the offence punishable
under Sections 302 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner was
rejected by this Court vide order dated 23.02.2023 passed in Cr.
Misc. No. 45711 of 2022.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner is in custody since 17.01.2022 and
the trial has not been concluded as yet.
5. Learned counsel for the informant and learned APP
for the State, on the other hand, have vehemently opposed the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81983 of 2025(3) dt.13-02-2026
2/2
prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that during
investigation the name of the petitioner has been transpired and
it has come during investigation that the petitioner was involved
in the present crime in question.
6. Vide order dated 22.12.2025, a report was called for
with regard to the stage of the trial. Report of the learned Trial
Court dated 08.01.2026 reveals that total sixteen prosecution
witnesses have been examined and cross examined, on
17.02.2025, statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded
and now the case is pending for final argument.
7. Considering the report of the learned Trial Court, I
am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection
with Rosera P.S. Case No. 403 of 2021, which gave rise to
S.Tr.No.340/2022, CIS No.73/2022, pending in the court of
learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-II, Rosera at
Samastipur.
8. Prayer is refused.
9. However, the learned Trial Court is directed to
expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Nitesh/-
U T
Checking your session…