Patna High CourtCR. MISC./54396/2025disposed

Pankaj Pal @ Pankaj Kumar Kaushal v. The State Of Bihar

2025-09-12Mr. Justice Satyavrat Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.54396 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-465 Year-2023 Thana- KUDRA District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== Pankaj Pal @ Pankaj Kumar Kaushal Son of Triloki Pal Resident of Village -Rampur, P.S-. Kudra, District -Kaimur at Bhabua ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajeev Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Nagendra Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 12-09-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Kudra P.S. Case No.465/2023 dated 05.12.2023, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 304B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The defects, as pointed out by the office, is hereby ignored.

4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner had earlier moved before this court seeking regular bail by filing Cr. Misc. No.79280/2024 but the same was permitted to be withdrawn by an order dated 10.01.2025 (Annexure-P/1). It is next submitted that the case is of dowry death and petitioner is the husband of the deceased. On query of the Court with regard to the stage of the trial, it is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54396 of 2025(3) dt.12-09-2025 2/2 fairly submitted that out of 7 prosecution witnesses, 5 prosecution witnesses have been examined and only the doctor and I.O. of the case remain to be examined.

5. The learned APP submits that since trial has commenced and five prosecution witnesses have been examined, as such, in the event, if privilege of regular bail is granted to the petitioner, the petitioner may abscond.

6. The Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail.

7. The regular bail application of the petitioner is rejected.

8. However, the District Magistrate and the Superintendent of Police, Kaimur (Bhabua) are directed to ensure that doctor and the Investigating Officer of the case shall remain physically present on the date fixed in the trial.

9. Let a copy of this order be sent to the District Magistrate and the Superintendent of Police, Kaimur (Bhabua) for their perusal and necessary action.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T