Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:144166 Court No. - 47 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25817 of 2025 Applicant :- Dr Ashwani Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Bhavya Sahai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sudhir Bharti Hon'ble Siddharth,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for State and perused the material on record. On 29.07.2025 the following order was passed by coordinate bench of this Court:- "The matter relates to medical negligence. The patient (victim) made an allegations inter alia that Dr. Shiba called her at Dr. Sajid's Clinic, New Vaishali Medicare Centre where after thorough check up, she was told that there is a lump on the outer side of her uterus and was referred to Hapur Health Care by Dr. Sajid for her CT Scan. From where she was taken to Blom Hospital where her CT Scan was done. Thereafter, she was told that to remove the lump, surgery will be required. On the same night, she was brought to New Vaishali Hospital and on the next day, they told that she has to undergo surgery. Thereafter, she was taken to Shuriz Nursing Home, Majidpura, Hapur for surgery. In the hospital, Dr. Ashwani came inside the operation theatre and said that an injection has to be given in her spine. After the injection and during surgery, instead of removing the lump, they removed her uterus. In the operation, four doctors, namely Dr. Shiba, Dr. Sajid, Dr. Ashwani and Dr. Taj Tyagi were present, who conducted operation. After treating her for three days, she was asked to go without giving any documents of admission and discharge. When after four months, she again developed the same problem, she went to doctors then they advised her for ultrasound and after report of ultrasound, she came to know that she does not have uterus. On the aforesaid complaint of patient/victim Smt. Anju, Chief Medical Officer, Ghaziabad got the inquiry conducted. The inquiry officer submitted his report stating inter alia that New Vaishali Medicare Centre is not registered in his office and Sajid and Parvez are not the qualified doctors. On the basis of said inquiry report, F.I.R. was registered on 30.01.2025 under Sections 15(2), 15(3) of Indian Medical Council Act, 1956, Section 30 of United Provinces Medical Act, 1917 and Section 318(4) of BNS against Sajid and Parvez. It is pointed out that during investigation, complicity of co- accused Shiba, Dr. Taj Tyagi, Saddam and Dr. Ashwani (present applicant) and others also came into light. The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that as per second statement dated 30.04.2025 of the patient/victim Smt. Anju, anesthesia injection was administered to her by Dr. Saddam and no operation has been conducted by Dr. Ashwani, who is a very junior MBBS doctor. He has no active role in the present case but he has been arrested and made scapegoat in the present case whereas the main accused/real culprits have not yet been arrested. In view of the above, Investigating Officer of this case is directed to file his personal affidavit indicating therein as to why co- accused persons have not yet been arrested. The affidavit shall also indicate the material, if any, against the applicant. Let this matter be listed on 13.08.2025 as fresh. Learned A.G.A. shall communicate this order to the Commissioner of Police, Ghaziabad as well as to the Investigating Officer concerned within 48 hours." Learned AGA states that he has informed Commissioner of Police, Ghaziabad, about the compliance of the aforesaid order, but no affidavit has been filed by Commissioner of Police, Ghaziabad. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant earlier that applicant is a junior M.B.B.S., doctor and he had no role in the operation, the applicant is directed to be enlarged on bail. He is languishing in jail since 25.06.2025. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, keeping in view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the paragraph no.53 of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement 2024, (SC)LawSuit 677 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. Let the applicant, Dr Ashwani, involved in the case crime no. 25/2025, under section 318(4), 118(2), 336(2), 340(2), 61(2) of B.N.S., and section 15(2) and 15(3) of Indian Medical Council, Act 1956 and section 30 of United Provinces Medical Act, Police Station- Bhojpur, District- Ghaziabad, 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 with the following conditions that :- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses. (ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Order Date :- 21.8.2025 Abhishek Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad