Vikki Sahni vs State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. And

averments made in the FIR. He next submits that CCTV footage of the Prerana Hospital also demonstrates that the deceased was brought by Vikki Sahni and Sarvesh Yadav and the dead body of the deceased was also thrown by them only. He also submits that as per the FIR version, deceased was given treatment in the residence of Sonam Sahni and Vikki Sahni. He submits that there is no any link evidence which may connect the appellant directly to commission of the offence in any way. He also submits that, in fact, his younger brother is running the business of medical store from where the informant had borrowed some medicines but he did not pay the amount of the same and when he was asked for payment, then there was some altercation between them. He also submits that as per prosecution case, it appears that this was the case of love affairs and when this came into knowledge of the parents of the deceased, due to fear of defame in the society, perhaps they themselves caused this incident which is a honour killing. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the appellant 3 CRLA No. 2050 of 2025 has criminal history which has been explained in para 27 of the affidavit and he is languishing in jail since 06.04.2025. He next added that in case the appellant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and he shall fully cooperate with the trial. He has further submitted that there is no possibility of the appellant to intimidate or pressurize the witnesses or any other persons acquainted with the facts of the present case. For the aforesaid reasons, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the instant criminal appeal deserves to be allowed and the impugned order may be set aside and consequently, the appellant deserves to be enlarged on bail. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the complainant and learned AGA the State have vehemently opposed contentions aforesaid and submit that appellant is named in the FIR. He is a fake doctor who carries the business in unlawful manner and his clinic was not duly registered. They also submit that on the inspection of appellant's clinic, which was conducted in the shop of one Vinod Pandey, the equipment with regard to conducting of miscarriage of pregnancy and medicines in this respect are recovered. They also submit that as per CCTV footage of Prerana Hospital, it is also apparent that on 05.04.2024 at about 08:10 a.m., the deceased was brought by co-accused Sarvesh Yadav and Vikki Sahni in unconscious state and at about 08:14 a.m., they took away the deceased by catching hands and legs and lay down in the interlocking of the outside of the hospital and thereafter they took the body of deceased at about 08:14 a.m. They further submit that the statements of the staff of Prenana hospital were recorded during the course of investigation, who stated that two persons brought one female patient in unconscious state and they laid down her over the bench and when they asked to them, they told that she had become unconscious, and when the hospital staff checked the pulse of the deceased, then it came into knowledge that the deceased has already died. They also submit that the applicant alongwith other co-accused persons treated the 4 CRLA No. 2050 of 2025 deceased in unlawful manner and when they became unsuccessful, they inflicted injuries and throttled the deceased. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the material available on record, including the allegations made in the FIR, it transpires that in the FIR itself it is mentioned that the applicant is a fake doctor who runs the medical clinic, where the deceased was given treatment and when condition of deceased became miserable, then she was brought in the residence of Vikki Sahni and Sonam Sahni and after much deterioration of health of the deceased, she was brought by Vikki Sahani and co-accused Sarvesh Yadav in Prerana Hospital. In this respect, statement of Sunil Kumar was also recorded who admits that there was an illicit relation between his deceased-sister and co-accused Sarvesh Yadav. As per CCTV footage of Prerana Hospital, the deceased Savita was brought by co-accused Sarvesh Yadav and Vikki Sahni on 05.04.2025 at about 08:10 a.m. in unconscious state and at about 08:14 a.m., they brought the deceased catching her hands and legs outside the hospital. As per the statements of the staff of Prerana Hospital, the deceased was brought by two persons in their hospital and they laid down the deceased over the bench and when they asked them, they stated that she has become unconscious and when staff of the hospital checked the pulse of the deceased, the fact came into their knowledge that the deceased has already died. As per autopsy report, the death of the deceased was caused due to asphyxia as a result of antemortem throttling and three other antemortem injuries on the body of the deceased. Thus, there are two sets of the events. One set is that the deceased was brought in the clinic for getting abortion and second event is that the death of the deceased was caused due to asphyxia as a result of throttling. As per CCTV footage, she was in the protection of one co-accused Vikki Sahni and Sarvesh Yadav who was paramour of the deceased. The role of Vikki Sahni is specifically shown in the FIR. As per 5 CRLA No. 2050 of 2025 CCTV footage is that he alongwith other co-accused Sarvesh Yadav brought the deceased in unconscious state in Prerana hospital and when the staff of the hospital checked the pulse of the deceased, they found that the deceased has already dead. As per postmortem report, , death of the deceased was due to asphyxia as a result of throttling and antemortem injuries were found on the body of the deceased. No explanation, with regard to the injuries cased to the deceased, was offered by the appellant, while she was in the protection and custody of the appellant and other co- accused Sarvesh Yadav. The case of the appellant-Vikki Sahni is different and is graver than that of other co-accused persons, namely, Neeraj Chaurasiya and Sonam Sahni. Accordingly, the bail application and criminal appeal of the appellant-Vikki Sahni is hereby dismissed. October 29, 2025 kkv/ (Pramod Kumar Srivastava,J.) KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

averments made in the FIR. He next submits that CCTV footage of the Prerana Hospital also demonstrates that the deceased was brought by Vikki Sahni and Sarvesh Yadav and the dead body of the deceased was also thrown by them only. He also submits that as per the FIR version, deceased was given treatment in the residence of Sonam Sahni and Vikki Sahni. He submits that there is no any link evidence which may connect the appellant directly to commission of the offence in any way. He also submits that, in fact, his younger brother is running the business of medical store from where the informant had borrowed some medicines but he did not pay the amount of the same and when he was asked for payment, then there was some altercation between them. He also submits that as per prosecution case, it appears that this was the case of love affairs and when this came into knowledge of the parents of the deceased, due to fear of defame in the society, perhaps they themselves caused this incident which is a honour killing. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the appellant 3 CRLA No. 2050 of 2025 has criminal history which has been explained in para 27 of the affidavit and he is languishing in jail since 06.04.2025. He next added that in case the appellant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and he shall fully cooperate with the trial. He has further submitted that there is no possibility of the appellant to intimidate or pressurize the witnesses or any other persons acquainted with the facts of the present case. For the aforesaid reasons, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the instant criminal appeal deserves to be allowed and the impugned order may be set aside and consequently, the appellant deserves to be enlarged on bail. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the complainant and learned AGA the State have vehemently opposed contentions aforesaid and submit that appellant is named in the FIR. He is a fake doctor who carries the business in unlawful manner and his clinic was not duly registered. They also submit that on the inspection of appellant's clinic, which was conducted in the shop of one Vinod Pandey, the equipment with regard to conducting of miscarriage of pregnancy and medicines in this respect are recovered. They also submit that as per CCTV footage of Prerana Hospital, it is also apparent that on 05.04.2024 at about 08:10 a.m., the deceased was brought by co-accused Sarvesh Yadav and Vikki Sahni in unconscious state and at about 08:14 a.m., they took away the deceased by catching hands and legs and lay down in the interlocking of the outside of the hospital and thereafter they took the body of deceased at about 08:14 a.m. They further submit that the statements of the staff of Prenana hospital were recorded during the course of investigation, who stated that two persons brought one female patient in unconscious state and they laid down her over the bench and when they asked to them, they told that she had become unconscious, and when the hospital staff checked the pulse of the deceased, then it came into knowledge that the deceased has already died. They also submit that the applicant alongwith other co-accused persons treated the 4 CRLA No. 2050 of 2025 deceased in unlawful manner and when they became unsuccessful, they inflicted injuries and throttled the deceased. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the material available on record, including the allegations made in the FIR, it transpires that in the FIR itself it is mentioned that the applicant is a fake doctor who runs the medical clinic, where the deceased was given treatment and when condition of deceased became miserable, then she was brought in the residence of Vikki Sahni and Sonam Sahni and after much deterioration of health of the deceased, she was brought by Vikki Sahani and co-accused Sarvesh Yadav in Prerana Hospital. In this respect, statement of Sunil Kumar was also recorded who admits that there was an illicit relation between his deceased-sister and co-accused Sarvesh Yadav. As per CCTV footage of Prerana Hospital, the deceased Savita was brought by co-accused Sarvesh Yadav and Vikki Sahni on 05.04.2025 at about 08:10 a.m. in unconscious state and at about 08:14 a.m., they brought the deceased catching her hands and legs outside the hospital. As per the statements of the staff of Prerana Hospital, the deceased was brought by two persons in their hospital and they laid down the deceased over the bench and when they asked them, they stated that she has become unconscious and when staff of the hospital checked the pulse of the deceased, the fact came into their knowledge that the deceased has already died. As per autopsy report, the death of the deceased was caused due to asphyxia as a result of antemortem throttling and three other antemortem injuries on the body of the deceased. Thus, there are two sets of the events. One set is that the deceased was brought in the clinic for getting abortion and second event is that the death of the deceased was caused due to asphyxia as a result of throttling. As per CCTV footage, she was in the protection of one co-accused Vikki Sahni and Sarvesh Yadav who was paramour of the deceased. The role of Vikki Sahni is specifically shown in the FIR. As per 5 CRLA No. 2050 of 2025 CCTV footage is that he alongwith other co-accused Sarvesh Yadav brought the deceased in unconscious state in Prerana hospital and when the staff of the hospital checked the pulse of the deceased, they found that the deceased has already dead. As per postmortem report, , death of the deceased was due to asphyxia as a result of throttling and antemortem injuries were found on the body of the deceased. No explanation, with regard to the injuries cased to the deceased, was offered by the appellant, while she was in the protection and custody of the appellant and other co- accused Sarvesh Yadav. The case of the appellant-Vikki Sahni is different and is graver than that of other co-accused persons, namely, Neeraj Chaurasiya and Sonam Sahni. Accordingly, the bail application and criminal appeal of the appellant-Vikki Sahni is hereby dismissed. October 29, 2025 kkv/ (Pramod Kumar Srivastava,J.) KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench