Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:28888 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4245 of 2025 Applicant :- Ram Vinay Verma Alias Ram Vinay And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Durga Prasad,Prabhakar Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for applicants, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of opposite parties- State and perused the record. 2. This first bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.137 of 2020, under Sections 323, 324, 325, 308, 504, 506, 188 IPC, registered at Police Station Hanswar, District Ambedkar Nagar. 3. As per contents of FIR, incident is said to have taken place on 03.08.2020 at about 08.00 A.M. when applicants alongwith co-accused is said to have attacked and inflicted grievous injuries upon informant and his family members. 4. Learned counsel for applicants submits that applicants have been falsely implicated in allegations levelled against them and that neither the FIR nor the statement of injured indicate any specific role assigned to applicants in causing injury. It is submitted that even medical report indicates only simple injuries upon informant. It is submitted that applicants do not have any previous criminal history. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State has opposed the bail application but does not dispute the aforesaid aspects. 6. 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." 7. Considering submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and upon perusal of material available on record, it appears that only general role of being a part of the group and inflicting injuries has been assigned without any specific role of the applicants in causing injury being indicated. There is no previous criminal history of applicants. 8. Looking to the nature of allegations levelled against the applicants and submission made in the bail application, without expressing any opinion on the merits of case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, particularly since no reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses has been alleged, prima facie, this Court finds, the applicants are entitled to be released on bail in this case. 9. Accordingly bail application is allowed. 10. Let applicants, Ram Vinay Verma Alias Ram Vinay and Vikal Verma @ Vikal Kumar involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on their 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 applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iii) In case, the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) The applicants 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 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court, absence of the applicants are 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 them in accordance with law. Order Date :- 16.5.2025 Subodh/- Digitally signed by :- SUBODH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench