SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS 02.04.2025 BAI No.434 of 2023 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. M.S.Pal, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Ms. Medha Pande, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Deepak Bisht, learned Deputy Advocate General, assisted by Mr. Devendra Singh, A.G.A. for the State. 3. Applicant- Kailash Nath, who is in judicial custody in connection with Case Crime No. 0008 of 2022, under Sections 109, 332, 353, 307 IPC; 4/25 of the Arms Act, 1959 and under Section 8/20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, registered at Police Station- Chalani Thana Lamgada, District Almora, has sought his release on bail. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has filed a supplementary affidavit, which is taken on record. Misc. Application (IA No. 3 of 2024) made therefor stands disposed of. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that there is no recovery of any narcotic substance or knife from the accused as alleged in the FIR. The allegation of attacking the constables and possessing the narcotic substance has been levelled just to falsely implicate the applicant; perusal of the supplementary medical report of the police personnel would reveal that there is a simple injury in his palm; besides this, the medical report of the injured constables are interchanged which has come in the statement of the Doctor. There was no spot recovery from the applicant and he was arrested on the next day of lodging the FIR i.e. on 10.02.2022 from his home. Furthermore, the applicant is languishing in jail for more than three years and only 10 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far and as per the charge-sheet, there are 23 prosecution witnesses to be examined. 7. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the principles of law, as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Mohd. Muslim Alias Hussain vs. State (NCT of Delhi, reported in (2023) 18. Para 23, 24 and 25 of the above said judgement are being extracted herein below “23. Before parting, it would be important to reflect that laws which impose stringent conditions for grant of bail, may be necessary in public interest; yet, if trials are not concluded in time, the injustice wrecked on the individual is immeasurable. Jails are overcrowded and their living conditions, more often than not, appalling. According to the Union Home Ministry’s response to Parliament, the National Crime Records Bureau had recorded that as on 31st December 2021, over 5,54,034 prisoners were lodged in jails against total capacity of 4,25,069 lakhs in the country20. Of these 122,852 were convicts; the rest 4,27,165 were undertrials. 24. The danger of unjust imprisonment, is that inmates are at risk of “prisonisation” a term described by the Kerala High Court in A Convict Prisoner v. State as “a radical transformation” whereby the prisoner: (SCC Online Ker Para 13) “13……loses his identity. He is known by a number. He loses personal possessions. He has no personal relationships. Psychological problems result from loss of freedom, status, possessions, dignity any autonomy of personal life. The inmate culture of prison turns out to be dreadful. The prisoner becomes hostile by ordinary standards. Self- perception changes.” 25. There is a further danger of the prisoner turning to crime, “as crime not only turns admirable, but the more professional the crime, more honour is paid to the criminal” (also see Donald Clemmer’s ‘The Prison Community” published in 1940). Incarceration has further deleterious effects - where the accused belongs to the weakest economic strata: immediate loss of livelihood, and in several cases, scattering of families as well as loss of family bonds and alienation from society. The courts therefore, have to be sensitive to these aspects (because in the event of an acquittal, the loss to the accused is irreparable), and ensure that trials – especially in cases, where special laws enact stringent provisions, are taken up and concluded speedily.” 8. Learned Deputy Advocate General vehemently opposed the bail. 9. Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion as to the final merits of the case, this Court is of the view that application deserves bail at this stage. 10. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant be released on bail, on his executing personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each of like amount, to the satisfaction of Court concerned. (Alok Mahra, J.) 02.04.2025 Kaushal