HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33009 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Ms. Mandvi Tripathi, 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.136 of 2025, under Sections 140(1), 103(1), 238, 3(5) B.N.S. and 3/25/27 Arms Act, Police Station- Partapur, District- Meerut, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the father of the informant was missing since 3.4.2025 at 07:40 p.m. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. The FIR is delayed by about four days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. Even the applicant is not named in the said FIR, which was instituted after much consultation. Subsequently, the informant gave another application at the police station, whereby he has nominated the applicant and one Rohit in it. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the said application is hit by Section 181 BNSS as it cannot be taken into consideration. Learned counsel has stated that the call details reveal that the deceased person had conversation with the applicant at 08:12 p.m. which also falsifies the FIR, whereby it is stated that deceased left his house at 07:40 p.m., but in the subsequent statement as a cover-up, the time of leaving house is stated to be 08:30 p.m. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mandvi Tripathi, Santosh Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Javed .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 7. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that a false recovery of CMP and iron rod has been foisted on the applicant. There is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 8.4.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application. 9. 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. 10. 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. 11. 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". 12. Learned A.G.A./State Law Officer could not bring forth any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the applicant. 13. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the delay of four days in institution of FIR coupled with the fact that applicant was not named in the FIR, 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. 14. Let the applicant- Javed, who is involved in aforementioned 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 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. BAIL No. 33009 of 2025 2 15. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 16. 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 15, 2025 Vikas Verma BAIL No. 33009 of 2025 3 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad