HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29664 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Chhote Lal Bhartiya, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri R.P. Patel, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.341 of 2024, under Sections 103(1), 238, 3(5) B.N.S., Police Station- Barhaj, District- Deoria, during the pendency of trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. She is not named in the FIR and has nothing to do with the said offence. The applicant is the wife of the deceased person and the named accused person is her brother Amarjeet, who is stated to have committed the said offence alongwith some unknown person over the inability of the couple to bear a child. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the applicant has been subsequently nominated on the basis of statements of two eye- witnesses, namely Akshay Vishwakarma and Jitendra Singh, who had seen the applicant also alongwith the deceased person and co-accused person Amarjeet on the date of incident. 6. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Chhote Lal Bhartiya Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Babli .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) has been roped in as an afterthought. There is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 18.12.2024 and she is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, she will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Per contra, learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the conduct of the applicant was unnatural as she did not even care to come and see the dead body of her husband and did not visit the place of recovery and house of the informant either. As such, she is not entitled for bail. 8. 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. 9. 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 reiterated by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (2022) 10 SCC 51. 10. Reiterating the aforesaid view, the Supreme Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 INSC 595, has again emphasized 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". 11. Learned State Law Officer could not bring forth any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the applicant. 12. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the fact that the applicant is not named in the FIR and her name has come up subsequently after four days of the incident, and without BAIL No. 29664 of 2025 2 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. 13. Let the applicant- Babli, who is involved in aforementioned 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence during trial. (ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 14. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 15. 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. October 27, 2025 Vikas Verma BAIL No. 29664 of 2025 3 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad