State of U.P v. Party

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sudhir Kumar, learned counsel for the informant and learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.

2. This bail application has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant Mohd Azharuddin seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.529 of 2023, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 313 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Bilsi, District Budaun.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the accused-applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number due to matrimonial dispute/family dispute and is languishing in jail since

06.02.2025. It is submitted that the accused applicant is husband of the victim and there is no specific allegation against him of demanding dowry or torturing the victim. It is further submitted that so-called abortion was happened due to unfortunate incident. It is further submitted that from perusal of the ultrasound report prepared by Dr. Ajay Govil, it reflects that ' No mass of fibraid is seen in uterus. It is also small for dates. It is missed abortion. C.R.L. 18 nin 8 weeks 2 days. Cervix Vaginal canal are normal. No fluid seen in pouch of Douglas. Both ovaries are normal. No solid or sonolucent mass seen in both adenexa. Impression: In uterine cavity weeks 2 days old deformed gestational sac witi dead E. Node seen missed abortion.'

4. It is further submitted that however, according to the FIR, incident was occurred on 23.08.2023 but the victim was visited to Dr. Ranjana Gupta for 2 BAIL No. 12963 of 2025 treatment on 29.08.2023 and this fact also reflects from the statement of Dr. Ranjana Gupta recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. before the I.O., in which she stated that victim was having slowly bleeding, therefore, she advised her for ultrasound and in ultrasound report, some P.O.C. product of conception was found and on that day, no medicine was provided to the victim. It is further submitted that from the statement of Dr. Anuja Singh recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. before the I.O., in which she stated that victim visited to her on 02.09.2023 and she was having slowly bleeding, therefore, she advised her for ultrasound and in ultrasound report, there were some parts of the baby in the cervix and after DNC, the blood clots were cleaned from the uterus and medicine was given.

5. It is further submitted that when other co-accused namely; Km. Nausheen, Nasreen and Shahwan challenged the quashing of entire proceedings of the said case in Application u/s 528 B.N.S.S., then Co-ordinate Bench of this Court pleased to stay the further proceedings against them.

6. It is further submitted that since the charge-sheet has already been submitted, therefore, there is no reasonable possibility of intimidating or pressurizing the prosecution witnesses. It is lastly submitted that applicant has no criminal antecedent and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for.

7. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre- trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

8. 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 3 BAIL No. 12963 of 2025 opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid 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 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 IPC/269 BNS. (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./84 of BNSS 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 IPC/209 of BNS. (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./351 of B.N.S.S. 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.

9. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

10. Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. September 16, 2025 Zafar (Santosh Rai,J.) MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sudhir Kumar, learned counsel for the informant and learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record.

2. This bail application has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant Mohd Azharuddin seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.529 of 2023, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 313 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Bilsi, District Budaun.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the accused-applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number due to matrimonial dispute/family dispute and is languishing in jail since

06.02.2025. It is submitted that the accused applicant is husband of the victim and there is no specific allegation against him of demanding dowry or torturing the victim. It is further submitted that so-called abortion was happened due to unfortunate incident. It is further submitted that from perusal of the ultrasound report prepared by Dr. Ajay Govil, it reflects that ' No mass of fibraid is seen in uterus. It is also small for dates. It is missed abortion. C.R.L. 18 nin 8 weeks 2 days. Cervix Vaginal canal are normal. No fluid seen in pouch of Douglas. Both ovaries are normal. No solid or sonolucent mass seen in both adenexa. Impression: In uterine cavity weeks 2 days old deformed gestational sac witi dead E. Node seen missed abortion.'

4. It is further submitted that however, according to the FIR, incident was occurred on 23.08.2023 but the victim was visited to Dr. Ranjana Gupta for 2 BAIL No. 12963 of 2025 treatment on 29.08.2023 and this fact also reflects from the statement of Dr. Ranjana Gupta recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. before the I.O., in which she stated that victim was having slowly bleeding, therefore, she advised her for ultrasound and in ultrasound report, some P.O.C. product of conception was found and on that day, no medicine was provided to the victim. It is further submitted that from the statement of Dr. Anuja Singh recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. before the I.O., in which she stated that victim visited to her on 02.09.2023 and she was having slowly bleeding, therefore, she advised her for ultrasound and in ultrasound report, there were some parts of the baby in the cervix and after DNC, the blood clots were cleaned from the uterus and medicine was given.

5. It is further submitted that when other co-accused namely; Km. Nausheen, Nasreen and Shahwan challenged the quashing of entire proceedings of the said case in Application u/s 528 B.N.S.S., then Co-ordinate Bench of this Court pleased to stay the further proceedings against them.

6. It is further submitted that since the charge-sheet has already been submitted, therefore, there is no reasonable possibility of intimidating or pressurizing the prosecution witnesses. It is lastly submitted that applicant has no criminal antecedent and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. Hence, bail has been prayed for.

7. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre- trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

8. 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 3 BAIL No. 12963 of 2025 opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid 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 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 IPC/269 BNS. (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./84 of BNSS 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 IPC/209 of BNS. (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./351 of B.N.S.S. 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.

9. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

10. Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. September 16, 2025 Zafar (Santosh Rai,J.) MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad