High Court · 2025
Case Details
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 267 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 352, 89 B.N.S., 2023 and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mehnagar, District Azamgarh, during the pendency of trial. As per the prosecution case, in brief, the complainant who is wife of the applicant got a first information report lodged on 29.05.2025 for the alleged offence under Sections 85, 115(2), 352, 89 of B.N.S., 2023 and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act against applicant-Mulayam and his other family members, namely, Shyam Narayan, Premsheela, Manish Yadav and Poonam Yadav making allegations inter alia that her marriage was solemnized with the applicant on 07.12.2021, but after some days of marriage the accused persons started demanding Rs. 5,00,000/- and on non-fulfillment of their demand they started harassing her. On account of scufÒe took place in her matrimonial home while she was carrying a pregnancy of four months, her foetus got aborted. When second time she became pregnant then the accused persons tried to kill her foetus on 25.05.2025 whereby she received injuries on her stomach and finger. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant and his family members have been falsely implicated. No such incident took place as alleged by the prosecution. Referring the USG of Gravid Uterus of victim dated 30.06.2024, it is pointed out that the victim was having disease thereby unable to conceive. In the said report dated 30.06.204 it is mentioned that "cardiac activity is not seen on colour doppler M mode" and there was impression of "single inrauterine pregnancy of average gestational age 6.5 WKS suggestive of missed abortion". So far as alleged incident dated 25.02.2025 is concerned, it is pointed out that when she was examined by the doctor on 29.05.2025 following four injuries were found on her body:- (i) Plaster done in left forearm on dated 18/05/2025 Adv. X-Ray. Referred District Hospital Azamgarh. (ii) Complain of left shoulder pain (iii) Complain of abdominal pain advice USG abdomen. Referred District Hospital, Azamgarh. (iv) Abraded on inner upper lip size 2 cm x 2 cm. Injury No. 1 is dated 18.05.2025, hence the same cannot said to be caused on 25.05.2025. So far as injury No. 3 is concerned, it is further pointed out that when USG of abdomen of the victim was done it was found that she was carrying pregnancy of 8 weeks and 2 days and as per opinion of the doctor it was blighted ovum. Much emphasis has been given by contending that since the applicant and his family members have been falsely implicated, therefore, the applicant moved an application on 20.06.2025 before the District Magistrate, Azamgarh to constitute a Medical Board to examine the victim and accordingly, vide order dated 01.07.2025 of the Chief Medical Superintendent, a Medical Board consisting of Ortho Surgeon, Physician and EMO was constituted and notice was given to the victim for her appearance on 07.07.2025, but she did not make herself available for getting her medical examination conducted. It is also pointed out that on account of aforesaid disease when victim fell ill on 25.05.2025, she was taken to hospital on 26.05.2025, from where, she instead of returning to her matrimonial home, went to her parental home and lodged a first information report on the false and concocted facts. Lastly, it is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no chance of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is languishing in jail since 16.06.2025 having no criminal antecedent and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate with the early disposal of the case. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by reiterating the prosecution case as mentioned in the F.I.R. but they do not dispute the above factual aspect of the matter as argued on behalf of the applicant. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that prima facie the applicant has made out a case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed. Let the applicant-Mulayam Yadav, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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) That the applicant shall cooperate with the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable. (ii) That the applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) That after his release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity. (iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned before the release of the applicant on bail. In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant. It is made clear that the observations contained in the instant order are confined to the issue of bail only and shall not affect the merit of the trial. Order Date :- 6.8.2025 Kashifa KASHIFA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 267 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 352, 89 B.N.S., 2023 and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mehnagar, District Azamgarh, during the pendency of trial. As per the prosecution case, in brief, the complainant who is wife of the applicant got a first information report lodged on 29.05.2025 for the alleged offence under Sections 85, 115(2), 352, 89 of B.N.S., 2023 and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act against applicant-Mulayam and his other family members, namely, Shyam Narayan, Premsheela, Manish Yadav and Poonam Yadav making allegations inter alia that her marriage was solemnized with the applicant on 07.12.2021, but after some days of marriage the accused persons started demanding Rs. 5,00,000/- and on non-fulfillment of their demand they started harassing her. On account of scufÒe took place in her matrimonial home while she was carrying a pregnancy of four months, her foetus got aborted. When second time she became pregnant then the accused persons tried to kill her foetus on 25.05.2025 whereby she received injuries on her stomach and finger. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant and his family members have been falsely implicated. No such incident took place as alleged by the prosecution. Referring the USG of Gravid Uterus of victim dated 30.06.2024, it is pointed out that the victim was having disease thereby unable to conceive. In the said report dated 30.06.204 it is mentioned that "cardiac activity is not seen on colour doppler M mode" and there was impression of "single inrauterine pregnancy of average gestational age 6.5 WKS suggestive of missed abortion". So far as alleged incident dated 25.02.2025 is concerned, it is pointed out that when she was examined by the doctor on 29.05.2025 following four injuries were found on her body:- (i) Plaster done in left forearm on dated 18/05/2025 Adv. X-Ray. Referred District Hospital Azamgarh. (ii) Complain of left shoulder pain (iii) Complain of abdominal pain advice USG abdomen. Referred District Hospital, Azamgarh. (iv) Abraded on inner upper lip size 2 cm x 2 cm. Injury No. 1 is dated 18.05.2025, hence the same cannot said to be caused on 25.05.2025. So far as injury No. 3 is concerned, it is further pointed out that when USG of abdomen of the victim was done it was found that she was carrying pregnancy of 8 weeks and 2 days and as per opinion of the doctor it was blighted ovum. Much emphasis has been given by contending that since the applicant and his family members have been falsely implicated, therefore, the applicant moved an application on 20.06.2025 before the District Magistrate, Azamgarh to constitute a Medical Board to examine the victim and accordingly, vide order dated 01.07.2025 of the Chief Medical Superintendent, a Medical Board consisting of Ortho Surgeon, Physician and EMO was constituted and notice was given to the victim for her appearance on 07.07.2025, but she did not make herself available for getting her medical examination conducted. It is also pointed out that on account of aforesaid disease when victim fell ill on 25.05.2025, she was taken to hospital on 26.05.2025, from where, she instead of returning to her matrimonial home, went to her parental home and lodged a first information report on the false and concocted facts. Lastly, it is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no chance of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is languishing in jail since 16.06.2025 having no criminal antecedent and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate with the early disposal of the case. Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by reiterating the prosecution case as mentioned in the F.I.R. but they do not dispute the above factual aspect of the matter as argued on behalf of the applicant. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that prima facie the applicant has made out a case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed. Let the applicant-Mulayam Yadav, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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) That the applicant shall cooperate with the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable. (ii) That the applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) That after his release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity. (iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned before the release of the applicant on bail. In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant. It is made clear that the observations contained in the instant order are confined to the issue of bail only and shall not affect the merit of the trial. Order Date :- 6.8.2025 Kashifa KASHIFA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad