Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:82707 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15704 of 2025 Applicant :- Rajeev Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Prakhar Saran Srivastava Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Prakhar Saran Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajeev Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA, for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.0128 of 2025, under Sections 318(4), 319(2), 3(5) and 105 BNS and Section 34(2) National Medical Commission Act, 2019, Police Station Dadri, District Gautam Budh Nagar during pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that however, as per allegation applicant was quack and due to his wrong treatment provided to the 'bhabhi' of the informant, who was under family way, she died but entire allegation is false and baseless. 4. He further submits that applicant was not the quack and he was the Administrator of the Hospital. 5. He further submits that however deceased was admitted in the Hospital of the applicant but subsequently considering her critical condition she was referred to another Hospital where it appears she died. 6. He further submits that even from the record it reflects that deceased died on 3.1.2025 but FIR of the present case was lodged on 10.3.2025, i.e., after more than two months. 7. He further submits that even on 16.1.2025, i.e., well before lodgement of the FIR of the present case informant of the case himself made a complaint on the Chief Minister Portal which has been annexed at page 90B of the paper book and in that application he did not state that applicant, who was Doctor, provided wrong treatment to the deceased and this fact again suggest that after two months a false story has been cooked up by the informant and implicated the applicant in the present matter. 8. He further submits that there is absolutely no cogent evidence against the applicant on record that due to his wrong treatment deceased died. 9. He further submits that applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 23.3.2025. 10. Per contra, learned AGA although opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant. 11. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 12. However, as per allegation applicant was quack and due to wrong treatment provided by applicant, 'bhabhi' of the informant died, who was in her family way but admittedly deceased did not die in the Hospital of the applicant. 13. Further, FIR of the present case was lodged after more than two months. Further, from page-90 B of the paper book it reflects that well before lodgement of the FIR of the present case, informant made a complaint on the Chief Minister Portal in which he did not disclose that applicant was the Doctor in the Hospital and he provided wrong treatment to the deceased. Considering this fact the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant in this regard cannot be completely ruled out at this stage. 14. Further, applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 23.3.2025. 15. 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 purpose. 16. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 17. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 18. Let the applicant-Rajeev 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. 19. 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. 20. 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 :- 17.5.2025 SKM Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad