Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:17285 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10064 of 2024 Applicant :- Ankur Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Yadav,Saumya Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rakesh Kumar Nayak Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State and perused the record. 2. This first bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.0465 of 2024, under Sections 352, 351(2), 109(1), 3(5) B.N.S. and Section 4/25 Arms Act, Police Station Akbarpur, District Ambedkar Nagar. 3. As per contents of FIR, incident is said to have taken place on 29.07.2024 at about 05.00 P.M. when the applicant is said to have attacked the son of informant, Aman Kumar and inflicted serious injuries upon him. 4. It has been submitted by learned counsel for applicant that he has been falsely implicated in the charges levelled against him and even otherwise the contents of FIR clearly indicate a sudden altercation having taken place on the spur of moment. It is submitted that the recovery of knife allegedly used in the incident is also without any independent witness. It is submitted that the single previous criminal history previous has already been explained by applicant who is 20 years of age and may be given opportunity for reform. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State has opposed the bail application with the submission that the statement of injured has clearly identified applicant as being one who attacked him resulting in serious abdominal injury due to which intestine of the injured is seriously affected. It is however not denied that single previous criminal history has been explained and the applicant is 20 years of age and he is under incarceration since 30.07.2024. 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 from contents of FIR as well as statement of injured that the atercation occurred apparently suddenly in the heat of moment resulting in injury. The applicant is only about 20 years of age and is under incarceration since 30.07.2024. Only charges having been framed, without expressing any opinion on the merits of case, this Court finds, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case. 8. Accordingly bail application is allowed. 9. Let applicant, Ankur, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his 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 he 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 his 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 him, 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 him in accordance with law. Order Date :- 26.3.2025 Subodh/- Digitally signed by :- SUBODH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench