Allahabad High Court
BAIL/35077/2026 of BHURA Vs STATE OF U.P. on 30 September 2026
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35077 of 2026 Court No. - 69 HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J. 1. Heard Sri Pawan Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for accused applicant, Sri Krishna Shankar, learned counsel for informant and learned A.G.A. for State. 2. The present bail
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35077 of 2026
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
2
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard Sri Pawan Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for accused applicant, Sri Krishna Shankar, learned counsel for informant and learned A.G.A. for State.
2. The present bail application has been moved by the applicant accused- Bhura to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 104 of 2026, under Sections 115(2), 85, 89 BNS, P.S.- Meerapur, District- Muzaffar Nagar, during the pendency of trial.
3. It is the contention of learned counsel for applicant that the accused applicant and co-accused have been falsely implicated in FIR dated 17.06.2026 lodged by the father of victim, who was married to the son of accused applicant on 09.06.2021. The allegation is matrimonial atrocities and forced miscarriage and assault. It is further contended that four person including the accused applicant and the husband of the victim have been made accused in the present case. The specific role attributed on the accused applicant is of providing medicine for miscarriage in the garb of pain killer. The accused applicant has no criminal history. Further submits that the supplementary medico legal report at page- 36 of the bail application clearly shows that there is no definite opinion about miscarriage. Investigation is continuing and the applicant is co-operating in the investigation. The accused applicant is languishing in jail since 13.08.2026. He seeks enlargement of accused on bail.
4. Learned counsel for informant and learned A.G.A. for State opposed Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pavan Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ashish Kaushik, G.A., Krishna Shankar Bhura .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s)
the bail application and submit that the specific role is assigned to the accused applicant. It is the applicant, who brought the medicine for miscarriage and administered it to the victim, which led to the miscarriage. Hence, the bail application be rejected.
5. This Court has taken into consideration the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. Considering the matrimonial discord between the parties and there is no specific medical report to show the miscarriage and except the statement of victim, there is nothing on record to show the way matrimonial atrocities has been caused, the accused/applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
7. Hence, without touching merit of the case, the bail application is allowed.
8. The accused/applicant 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 court concerned in view of observation made by the Supreme Court in its dictums of Girish Gandhi Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh [(2024) 10 SCC 674] and Policy Strategy for grant of bail in re [(2024)10SCC 685].
9. The accused-applicant shall cooperate in judicial process for fair and speedy disposal. October 1, 2026 Sharad/- BAIL No. 35077 of 2026 2 (Avnish Saxena,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHARAD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad