Patna High CourtCR. MISC./70082/2025dismissed

Md. Firangzeb @ Firangzeb @ Md. Sahil @ Sahil v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-11Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70082 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1025 Year-2024 Thana- AHIYAPUR District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Md. Firangzeb @ Firangzeb @ Md. Sahil @ Sahil S/o Mohammad Kudus R/o Village - Patiyasa, P.S - Ahiyapur, District - Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ganesh Prasad Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Raj Kishor Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 11-02-2026 Heard the parties.

2. This is the second attempt of the petitioner for grant of regular bail in connection Ahiyapur (Garhan O.P.) P.S. Case No. 1025 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 137(2), 140(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 13.05.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 10993 of 2025 along with Cr. Misc. No. 19738/2025 which reads as under:- Both these application are arising from the same P.S. i.e., Ahiyapur P.S. Case No. 1025 of 2024, therefore, they are being heard together and are being decided by a common order.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

3. The petitioners seek bail in connection with Ahiyapur P.S. Case No. 1025 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable under

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70082 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026 2/2 Sections 137(2), 140(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita to which later on Section 103(1) of the BNS was added.

4. The petitioners have been found involved in the murder of the deceased. They have entered into a conspiracy, called the deceased. To capture the land of the deceased, they have killed the deceased. The bail application of the other coaccused has been rejected by this Court. The petitioner are in custody since 02.08.2024.

5. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the informant that the trial has started and one witness has been examined.

6. Considering the gravity of the offence and in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of X vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. reported in 2024 SCC Online SC 3539 observing that once the trial has started and the witnesses are being examined, the accused persons should not be granted bail ordinarily, these applications are dismissed.

3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that from the report of the trial judge, it appears that out of ten charge-sheet witnesses, seven witnesses have been examined.

4. Considering the aforesaid facts, this Court finds no ground to review its earlier order.

5. Accordingly, this application is dismissed again. (Sandeep Kumar, J) tusharika/- U T