HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25798 of 2025 Court No. - 68 HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J. Heard Shri Anil Kumar Tiwari along with Shri Raj Kumar Tiwari, learned counsels for the applicant, Shri Shashank Singh, learned Brief Holder for the State, Shri Santosh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the first informant and perused the record. This bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant, Pankaj Tiwari, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 98 of 2023, under Sections 498-A, 323, 313, 504, 506, 406, 342, 427 IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Bhatpar Rani, District Deoria, during the pendency of the trial before the Court below. The bail application of the applicant in the Court below has been rejected by the learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge (FTC)-Ist, Deoria vide order dated 11.7.2025 and the applicant has been languishing in jail since 4.7.2025. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused-applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number and is languishing in jail since 4.7.2025. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that The applicant is the husband of the first informant. The marriage was solemnized on 8.3.2019. The FIR in question has been lodged nominating the applicant and six other family members of the applicant with the allegation that the informant was harassed and beaten for bringing insufficient dowry. The informant and the applicant began to live separately in Gurugram (Haryana). The behaviour of the applicant at Gurugram did not Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anil Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Santosh Kumar Chaubey Pankaj Tiwari .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) change and the informant continued to be maltreated and deprived of food and water. Her mobile phone was also taken away. The applicant invited his friend Prakash Singh Mihir (co-accused) to live along with him. The informant one day saw the applicant and co-accused Prakash Singh Mihir in an objectionable state and raised a voice whereafter, they both beat up the informant severely resulting in her miscarriage and death of the fetus in the womb. In the FIR instances of physical harassment have been narrated. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the allegations set out in the FIR are preposterous and the correct facts are that the informant is employed in CSB Bank, Limited, Jawahar Nagar, Gurugram and earning Rs.3,00,000/- per annum. The informant was pregnant and the doctor on examination advised her that the fetus had not developed and the embryonic cardiac activity was not visualized on grey scale, colour droppler and M mode study and advised her to abort the pregnancy. The allegation of causing injuries to the fetus is false. In fact, this case is a case of no injury. The applicant had approached a Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 11577 of 2023 and the applicant was relegated to mediation. The informant demanded a sum of Rs.80 lacs and the mediation failed. The writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 24.5.2024 protecting the co- accused till the submission of charge sheet. As regards the applicant, it was observed that in case the applicant surrendered before the Court within 60 days and applied for bail/anticipatory bail, the same would be considered in the light of the decision rendered in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh versus State of U.P. It has also been argued that the doctor who had examined the informant and carried out the abortion procedure has not definitely stated that the abortion was the result of the alleged injuries caused by the applicant. It is also submitted that the charge sheet against the applicant has already been filed and the custodial interrogation of the applicant is no longer required. The co- accused Prakash Singh Mihir has not been charge sheeted which fact clearly demonstrate the falsity of the FIR version. Lastly, it is submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and shall extend all cooperation in the trial and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if released. Hence, bail has been prayed for. BAIL No. 25798 of 2025 2 Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the first informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. Considering all above facts and circumstances, medical report with respect to non development of fetus, opinion of the doctor, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima facie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the accused-applicant, Pankaj Tiwari, involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence. 2. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity. 3. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial. 4. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned. In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail. February 10, 2026 Ravi Prakash BAIL No. 25798 of 2025 3 (Ashutosh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAVI PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad