HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14250 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Sudhir Mehrotra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Devottam Pandey, Advocate holding brief of Srri Pramod Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri R.P. Patel, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 547 of 2024 (NCR No.72 of 2024), under Sections 85, 89, 115(2), 352 B.N.S. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Syana, District- Bulandshahr, during the pendency of trial. PROSECUTION STORY: 4. The applicant, who happens to be husband of the sister of the informant, is stated to have assaulted her and hit in her abdomen, thereby left her in pains on 10.11.2024 at about 01:00 p.m. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT: 5. The applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. 6. In the instant case, an NCR was instituted by the informant at the police station the same day i.e. on 10.11.2024 at 19:38 hours. The NCR does not Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sudhir Mehrotra, Arvind Kumar Verma, Mahesh Sharma, Suyash Mehrotra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Pramod Kumar Singh Nishant .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) indicate that the injuries were grievous in nature. The victim was medically examined at PHC, Syana, Bulandshahr on the next day of occurrence i.e. 11.11.2024 and the said medical report indicates that she was pregnant by five months and had compliant of pain in her lower abdomen and she was referred to higher center. 7. It is true that the fetus was aborted subsequently, but the applicant is not the person who caused said abortion. The doctor conducting medical treatment and abortion of the victim has categorically stated that she did not observe any external injuries on the body of the victim but she has stated that she observed an injury on the umbilical cord of the victim, which may be caused by an assault and might be the reason for said miscarriage. 8. The said statement of the doctor is vague and it is not possible to cause injury to umbilical cord only, if injuries were not observed on outer part of the body or any other part of the fetus, as such, it is a clear cut case of false implication. 9. Much reliance has been placed on the supplementary affidavit dated 12.8.2025, which is on record, whereby the victim/sister of the informant and other family members are seen reaching the house in the pictures annexed therein. The victim and informant are seen forcibly entering into the house by breaking the lock of door of the house of applicant. The victim is visible breaking the lock with a hammer. The said use of force by her may be the cause of said miscarriage. 10. Reliance has also been placed on the Challani Report, which has been filed as Annexure-SA-2 to the said supplementary affidavit, whereby applicant and other family members were challaned U/s 170/126/135 BNSS by the police. The applicant was granted bail in the said case after furnishing sureties the next day. Even the said bail bonds have been filed in the said supplementary affidavit. 11. The applicant is languishing in jail since 17.3.2025, as such, he is incarcerated for more than six months. The trial is not moving ahead as not even the charge has been framed. The fundamental rights of the applicant enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India stand violated. BAIL No. 14250 of 2025 2 12. There is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. He is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF STATE/OPPOSITE PARTY: 13. The bail application has been vehemently opposed on the ground that miscarriage of the victim had occurred about six days after the incident and there is every possibility that injuries sustained by the injured person might have been overlooked by the doctor. 14. The instant act of the applicant falls within the category of maximum mental depravity as he got the said fetus forfeited by using force and precious life has been lost due to the said act of the applicant. In Rebuttal: 15. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the doctor who conducted medical examination on 11.11.2024 did not observe any injury on the abdomen of the victim. CONCLUSION: 16. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the medical examination report of the victim conducted on 11.11.2024, whereby no external injury was observed on the body of the victim except the complaint of pain in lower abdomen, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima facie, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 17. Let the applicant- Nishant, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence during trial. (ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. BAIL No. 14250 of 2025 3 (iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 18. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 19. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. September 23, 2025 Vikas Verma BAIL No. 14250 of 2025 4 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad