Dr. Pankaj Kumar @ Pankaj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26263 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-296 Year-2024 Thana- IMAMGANJ District- Gaya ====================================================== Dr. Pankaj Kumar @ Pankaj Kumar S/o Rajdeo Paswan R/o Raniganj Bus Stand, P.S.- Imamganj, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Priya Ranjan, Adv For the Informant :

Mr. Jawed Jafar Khan, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Binod Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 17-07-2025 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.P.P for the State.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Imamganj P.S. Case No. 296 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable u/s 304 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C.

3. As per the prosecution case, the son of the informant has suffered from the lump in his thigh and for the treatment of the same the informant has taken him to the clinic of Dr. Pankaj Kumar. It is further alleged that after getting treatment from both Dr. Antony and Dr. Pankaj, the infection of his son started increasing and subsequently he died during the treatment.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26263 of 2025(3) dt.17-07-2025 2/2 that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. It is further submitted that there is a delay of thirteen days in lodging the FIR without any plausible reason. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has clean antecedent and is in custody since 27.02.2025.

5. Learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and have stated that the death of the informant's son has occurred due to negligent treatment by the petitioner and during the course of the investigation, it has come that the petitioner could not produce any degree certificate as well as a certificate regarding registration of his nursing home which shows that the petitioner has no knowledge regarding any medication and he is just a quack doctor, hence, he does not deserve the liberty of bail.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and also taking into account the nature of allegation being serious, this court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and the same is hereby rejected.

(Sourendra Pandey, J) Jyoti/- U T