Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:115049 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38982 of 2024 Applicant :- Rohit Kumar @ Photo Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Singh,Dinesh Singh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- Chandrajeet,G.A.,Jai Singh Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard Sri Anil Kumar Singh and Dinesh Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant , Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State Respondent and perused the record. 2. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 373 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 103(1), 109, 115(2), 352 B.N.S., Police Station Saraylakhansi, District Mau, during the pendency of trial. 3. An altercation ensued during a ceremony on 19.09.2024 at about 10:30 p.m., as such, five named accused persons along with one unknown person are stated to have thrown off the son of the informant from the roof causing his death. The applicant is not named in the FIR. 4. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has nothing to do with the said offence. 5. The FIR was instituted in the morning at about 4:42 a.m. 6. As per post-mortem report, only one injury was observed on the chin that too was an abrasion and contusion 2 cm x 1 cm. as such, no cause of death could be ascertained as it was obscured and viscera was preserved. 7. The said allegations stands falsified from the post-mortem report itself. 8. There are general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons. 9. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. 10. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 22.09.2024. The applicant is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. It is further submitted that on the similar footing the co-accused Ramkrishna Piyush, Vipul Kumar, Vishal Kumar and Shailesh Kumar have been granted bail by the Court vide order dated 19.11.2024, 05.12.2024, 05.12.2024 and 21.11.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 41233 of 2024, 40567 of 2024, 40447 of 2024 and 39982 of 2024 respectively, therefore, the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail. 11. The bail application has been opposed but the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant could not be disputed. 12. The well-known principle of "Presumption of Innocence Unless Proven Guilty," gives rise to the concept of bail as a rule and imprisonment as an exception. 13. A person's right to life and liberty, guaranteed by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, cannot be taken away simply because the person is accused of committing an offence until the guilt is established beyond a reasonable doubt. Article 21 of the Indian Constitution states that no one's life or personal liberty may be taken away unless the procedure established by law is followed, and the procedure must be just and reasonable. The said principle has been recapitulated by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., 2022 INSC 690. 14. Reiterating the aforesaid view the Supreme Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement 2024 INSC 595 has again emphasised that the very well-settled principle of law that bail is not to be withheld as a punishment is not to be forgotten. It is high time that the Courts should recognize the principle that "bail is a rule and jail is an exception". 15. Learned AGA could not bring forth any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the applicant. 16. It is settled principle of law that the object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused at the trial. No material particulars or circumstances suggestive of the applicant fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like have been shown by learned AGA. 17. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 18. Let the applicant, Rohit Kumar @ Photo, involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence, (ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 351 BNSS 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. 19. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. 20. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 16.7.2025 pks Digitally signed by :- PAWAN KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad