The counsel also submitted that the accused was willing to comply with any conditions imposed by the court.The Chandigarh district court on Thursday dismissed the second regular bail application of former Panjab University (PU) professor Bharat Bhushan Goyal, who is accused of murdering his wife, holding that the examination of the prosecution’s first witness and filing of the chargesheet did not constitute a “substantial change in the circumstances” to justify his release.Additional Sessions Judge Dr Harpreet Kaur observed that Bharat Bhushan’s earlier bail application had already been dismissed on merits and that the grounds raised in the second plea were insufficient for reconsideration.“The present second regular bail application has been filed by the applicant solely on the ground that challan has been presented and the material witness… has been examined. The same cannot be treated as substantial change in the circumstances of the case,” the court said.Referring to the Supreme Court’s judgment in Virupakshappa Gouda and another versus State of Karnataka, the court further observed, “Filing of chargesheet does not in any manner lessen the allegations made by the prosecution. Rather the filing of the chargesheet establishes that after due investigation, the investigating agency having found material has placed the chargesheet for the trial of the accused”.“At the stage of consideration of bail application, the court is not expected to undertake a meticulous examination of the evidence or record finding on its admissibility or evidentiary value as the same are matters to be determined during trial,” the court said.Holding that there was “no material change” in the circumstances of the case after the dismissal of first bail application coupled with the seriousness of the allegations, nature of the offence, and the stage of proceeding, the court said it did not find “any justifiable ground” to enlarge the accused on regular bail.According to the prosecution, the FIR was initially registered on the complaint of Bharat Bhushan himself, who claimed that unknown persons had entered his PU residence on the intervening night of November 3-4, 2021, and murdered his wife, Seema, after tying her hands, legs and mouth. During investigation, however, the Central Forensic Science Laboratory (CFSL) reportedly found that the iron mesh door had been cut from inside the house. The prosecution further relied on a Brain Electrical Oscillation Signature (BEOS) profiling report, following which the PU professor was arrested on December 8, 2025.Story continues below this adSeeking bail, counsel for Bharat Bhushan, submitted that the accused had been falsely implicated and that circumstances had changed after the dismissal of his first bail plea. The defence argued that after the dismissal of the first bail application, the case was committed to the sessions court and after framing of the charges, the statement of Dr Parul Goyal (daughter of the accused) was recorded. After recording her statement, no other witness is left whom the applicant can influence. Her examination constitutes a “substantial change in the circumstances”, the counsel argued.The defence further contended that the investigation in the present case has not been conducted in a “fair manner”, arguing that the brain mapping tests are not admissible in evidence and therefore cannot be considered as legally admissible evidence. The counsel also claimed that there is no direct evidence to connect the accused with the alleged offence and since he is in custody for a period of more than seven months, he is entitled for the grant of bail.The counsel also submitted that the accused was willing to comply with any conditions imposed by the court.Opposing the plea, the prosecution argued that there was no change in circumstances since the rejection of the earlier bail application. The state counsel submitted the allegations against the accused are grave in nature and prosecution has collected sufficient scientific evidence, including brain mapping test report, which prima facie supports the prosecution case.