Taj Ali @ Md. Taj Ali v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28973 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-366 Year-2023 Thana- ARA NAGAR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Taj Ali @ Md. Taj Ali S/o Md. Kapil @ Md. Fahim Kapil Resident of vill - Rauza Mohalla, P.s.- Ara Town, Distt.- Bhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 19-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Ara Town P.S. Case No. 366 of 2023, lodged on 11.05.2023, under Sections 341, 307, 332, 333 & 353 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25(1-b)a, 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act, pending before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge-XIII, Bhojpur at Ara.

3. As per the prosecution, F.I.R. has been lodged against the accused persons from whose possession Rs. 4,99,500/- along with one country made pistol and three live cartridges has been recovered along with other materials.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He further

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28973 of 2025(4) dt.19-09-2025 2/2 submits that the petitioner has been in custody since 16.09.2023 and, till date, even the charge has not been framed. He further submits that there are five criminal cases pending against the petitioner, in which he is pursuing bail. He further submits that on the previous occasion, this Court had directed the trial court to intimate under what circumstances the charge has not been framed against the petitioner.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the aforesaid report has been received, and it transpires from the said report that counsel for the accused was not available, therefore, arguments could not be heard on the point of charge. He further submits that the case was committed on 08.08.2025.

6. In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Therefore, the bail application of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

(Dr. Anshuman, J) Aman Kumar/- U T