Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:65924 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12241 of 2025 Applicant :- Waseem Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Sharma,Rajiv Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Abhishek Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajiv Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State- respondent. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 54 of 2025, under Sections 125, 125 A, 125 B, 105 BNS, Police Station Badaut, District Baghpat, during pendency of the trial in the court below. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that however applicant is named in the FIR and as per allegation he was the contractor and due to his negligence the wooden bridge was collapsed during religious ceremony and in the incident seven persons died but on the basis of false allegations, applicant has been made accused in the present matter. 4. He further submitted that actually due to over capacity the bridge was collapsed and it was an accident but applicant has been made scapegoat in the matter. 5. He further submitted that from the nakal rapat of the case which has been annexed at page-34 of the paper book, it reflects that even according to the family members of the deceased, no one was responsible for the incident and therefore, they did not want to conduct the post mortem of the deceased persons and therefore, only post mortem of one deceased was conducted. He further submitted that except bald and verbal allegations there is absolutely no evidence which can suggest that due to negligence of the applicant, incident occurred. 6. He further submitted that applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 29.1.2025. 7. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant was the contractor and he prepared the wooden bridge but during religious ceremony, the same was collapsed and due to that seven persons died and as applicant was the contractor, therefore, at this stage, it cannot be said that he was not guilty and therefore, considering the nature of allegations and number of deceased persons, he should not be released on bail. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 9. However, as per allegations, applicant was a contractor and due to his negligence the wooden bridge which was prepared by him was collapsed and due to that reason seven persons died but the submission advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that prima facie, it appears to be a case of accident also finds support from the nakal rapat of the case which has been annexed alongwith the instant bail application and from its perusal it reflects that even the family of the deceased persons were of the view that no one was responsible for the incident and therefore, they also did not give permission for their post mortem and it appears out of seven deceased, post mortem of only one deceased was conducted. 10. Further, considering the allegation levelled against the applicant, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that due to over capacity, the alleged wooden bridge was collapsed and incident occurred, cannot be completely ruled out at this stage. 11. Further, law is settled that unless proven guilty, an accused is deemed to be innocent and bail application of an accused should not be dismissed for punitive purposes. 12. Further law is also settled that bail is a rule while bail rejection is an exception. 13. Further, applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 29.1.2025. 14. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 15. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 16. Let the applicant-Waseem, be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 17. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 18. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 29.4.2025 Ankita Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad