Md. Azad @ Md. Azad Alam @ Azad Alam v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12267 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-45 Year-2022 Thana- TATARPUR District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== Md. Azad @ Md. Azad Alam @ Azad Alam S/o- Late Shami Alam, Resident of village- Chamelichak P.S.- Habibpur District- Bhagalpur.... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Allama Abdul Quadir Jamal Faridi, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anuj Kumar Shrivastava, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 24-07-2025 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with S.T. No. 94 of 2023 (arising out of Tatarpur P.S. Case No. 45/2022 registered for the offence under Sections 326, 307, 302, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3, 4 5 of the Explosive Substance Act.

3. The accused/petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and is in custody since 07.03.2022.

4. It appears out of submission raised by learned counsel appearing for petitioner that out of 17 prosecution witnesses, 16 witnesses now examined and this matter is still pending for examination of one remaining witness, where petitioner is in custody since 07.03.2022. It is pointed out that the speedy trial is fundamental right of petitioner and petitioner could

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12267 of 2025(5) dt.24-07-2025 2/2 not be kept behind bar for indefinite period in want of trial. Reliance was made on Hussainara Khatoon and Others Vs. Home Secretary, State of Bihar, reported in 1980(1)SCC 98.

5. It appears from the perusal of report dated 24.05.2025 as made available from the office of District Additional and Sessions Judge-XI, Bhagalpur, through letter no. 73 that out of 17 witnesses, 16 witnesses examined till date and the request was already made to concerned authority for only remaining examination of witness, who is a doctor. It is further assured through same letter that trial of this case would be concluded within next three months.

6. Considering the aforesaid fact, as trial of this case is at fag end, accordingly, the prayer of bail of the petitioner is rejected herewith for the present.

7. However, if trial is not concluded within three months as of now, petitioner may renew prayer of his bail, if so advised. (Chandra Shekhar Jha, J) veena/- U T