Patna High CourtCR. MISC./35155/2025dismissed

Mohammad Allauddin @ Md Allauddin v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-10Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35155 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-72 Year-2023 Thana- PURUSHOTTAMPUR District- West Champaran ====================================================== Mohammad Allauddin @ MD Allauddin S/o Sheikh Arman R/o VillBherihari, P.S.- Purushottampur, Distt- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Brij Kishor Mishra, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 10-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. This is the second attempt on behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 727 of 2024, CIS 727 of 2024 arising out of Purushottampur P.S. Case No. 72 of 2023 registered for the offence under Sections 302, 201/34 of the IPC.

3. Earlier, the bail application of the petitioner has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 19.04.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 5232 of 2024, which reads as under: "Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. This application for grant of regular bail arises out of Purushottampur P.S. Case No.72 of 2023 registered for the offence punishable under sections 302 and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35155 of 2025(4) dt.10-02-2026 2/2

3. It is alleged that the petitioner called the deceased and thereafter the dead-body of the deceased was found.

4. The petitioner is in custody since 23.08.2023. During investigation, materials have come to connect the petitioner with the crime.

5. Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of regular bail. Accordingly, this bail application is rejected. The trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as early as possible."

4. From explanation of the S.P., it appears that seven witnesses have been examined.

5. Considering the fact that the trial is on the verge of conclusion and also the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of X Vs. State of Rajasthan and Anr. reported in 2024 SCC Online SC 3539, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this application is dismissed (Sandeep Kumar, J) priyanka/- U T