Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:23936 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3481 of 2025 Applicant :- Suneeta Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State and perused the record. This first bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No. 378 of 2024, under Sections 131 BNS and 3, 5(1) U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, Police Station Bikapur, District Faizabad/ Ayodhya. As per contents of the FIR, preliminary allegation has been levelled against one Ram Kumar, husband of the applicant who is said to have induced the informant into attending meeting allegedly for the purposes of religious conversion on the process of providing allurement. It is submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the charges levelled against her has been nominated only on account of fact that the applicant is wife of the main accused Ram Kumar. It is submitted that there is no allegation levelled against the applicant in the FIR having any role with regard to Section imputed against her. It is further submitted that the applicant is incarceration since 21.10.2024 without any previous criminal history. Learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State opposed the prayer for bail but does not dispute the said facts. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40 has specifically held that bail is to be a norm and an under-trial is not required to be in jail for ever pending trial. Relevant paragraphs of the judgment are as under :- "21. In bail applications, generally, it has been laid down from the earliest times that the object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative. Deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment, unless it is required to ensure that an accused person will stand his trial when called upon. The courts owe more than verbal respect to the principle that punishment begins after conviction, and that every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried and duly found guilty." "27. This Court, time and again, has stated that bail is the rule and committal to jail an exception. It has also observed that refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution." Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and upon perusal of material available on record, it appears that there is no specific allegation levelled against the applicant with regard to inducing any religious conversion or of having provided any allurement. The applicant is under in incarceration for last six months without any previous criminal history. The aspect of whether the sections imputed against the applicant would be attracted as per allegations levelled in the FIR is subject matter of trial. Accordingly bail application is allowed. Let applicant Suneeta involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through her counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nayay Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 of Bharatiya Nayay Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of Bharatiya Nayay Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of Bharatiya Nayay Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). 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 her in accordance with law. Order Date :- 25.4.2025 Muk Digitally signed by :- MOHD UMAR KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench