Krishna v. State NCT Of Delhi

$~9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 3415/2025 KRISHNA .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Vaibhav Sharma, Mr. Bhavya Sethi, Ms. Urvashi Sharma, Mr.

Vinayak Gautam, Mr. Sukrit, Advocates.

Versus

STATE NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through:

Mr. Manoj Pant, APP for State with SI Priyanka.

CORAM:

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA

O R D E R

% 11.11.2025 1.

By way of the present application, the applicant seeks grant of regular bail in FIR bearing no.0444/2025, registered at Police Station North Rohini, Delhi for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 221/132121(1)/126(2)/76/109/351(2)/3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereafter 'BNS') and Section 4 of the Medicare Service Persons and Medicare Service Institutions (Prevention of Violence and Damage of Property) Act, 2008 (hereafter 'MSPMS').

2.

Briefly stated, the facts of the present case, as alleged, are that on 09.06.2025, when Dr. Reena Kumari was returning from ward no. 12 OPD of Dr. Baba Saheb Ambedkar Hospital (BSA), Rohini, she was accosted, The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

gheraoed and physically· assaulted by 4-5 women who attempted to strangle her by using the stethoscope which she was wearing around her neck and during scuffle, the doctor's clothes were also torn by those women. In the course of investigation, it was revealed that on 01.06.2025 one lady 'S' had been brought to BSA Hospital for the delivery of a child. She was admitted in the hospital on 02.06.2025 and on the same day, she gave birth to a male child. However, the new born baby did not cry at the time of birth and upon investigation of the medical condition of the child, it was found that the child was suffering from lung infection. The new born baby was immediately shifted to the hospital's nursery. According to the IO, the baby was kept under supervision of the doctors.

However, as the child did not recover from the infection, it led to his untimely demise. When the news of the child's demise was given to the family members, they became violent and attacked the complainant Dr. Reena Kumari. The complainant underwent a medical examination, and the opinion given by the examining doctor indicated that the injuries were "dangerous" in nature. Accordingly, Sections 109 and 351 (2) of BNS were added to the case. 3.

The learned counsel appearing for the present accused/applicant argues that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and she has been in judicial custody since 13.08.2025 and is about 62 years in age. It is contended that no prima facie case is made out against the applicant, as there is no of evidence to suggest that the applicant has committed the alleged offence. It is stated that the co-accused Meena in the present case has already been granted regular bail by the learned Trial Court vide order dated 23.06.2025. It is further stated that another co-accused/Poonam has been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 30.07.2025, passed by this The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

Court. Therefore, it is prayed that accused/applicant be granted regular bail. 4.

The learned APP for the State, on the other hand, opposes the present application and argues that allegations against the accused are serious in nature, and therefore the present application for grant of regular bail be dismissed.

5.

This Court has heard arguments addressed by the learned counsel for both the parties and has perused the material on record. 6.

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, and the fact that the applicant herein has been in judicial custody since 13.08.2025, and co-accused Meena and Poonam have already been enlarged on bail, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the applicant on her furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/- with surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Successor Court/Link Court/Duty Judge concerned on the following terms and conditions: i) The applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the concerned Court and if the applicant has a passport, she shall surrender the same to the concerned trial court. ii) In case of change of residential address/contact details, the applicant shall promptly inform the same to the concerned Court and IO/SHO concerned.

iii) The applicant shall appear in Court on every date of hearing unless exempted;

iv) The applicant shall not communicate with, or come into contact with the complainant or any of the prosecution witnesses, or tamper with the evidence of the case.

7.

Accordingly, the present application stands disposed of. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

8.

Nothing expressed hereinabove shall tantamount to an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

9.

The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. DR. SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J NOVEMBER 11, 2025/vc The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.