Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:134083 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22884 of 2025 Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Krishna Mishra,Sudhanshu Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. 3. Heard Sri Satendra Kumar, Advocate holding brief of Sri Sudhanshu Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ashutosh Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.335 of 2024, under Sections 231, 217(ख), 308(6) and 108 B.N.S., Police Station Narkhi, District Firozabad, during the pendency of trial. 5. As per prosecution story, the FIR was instituted by the applicant against unknown person regarding death of his brother on 24.09.2024 at about 8:40 a.m. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the FIR was instituted the same day about three hours after the incident. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case on the basis of a suicide note which was supplied by the applicant to have been given by the wife of the deceased person. The deceased was a drunkard and had sustained injuries somewhere and expired as such. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the drinking habit of the deceased person is but evident from the post-mortem report itself as Ethyl alcohol was recovered from his body. The name of the applicant has been added out of suspicion only. It is a clear-cut case of false implication. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 21.05.2024 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 A.G.A. 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 Ors., 2022 INSC 690. 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. The Supreme Court in Jalaluddin Khan Vs. Union of India, (2024) 10 SCC 574, held that 'bail is the rule, jail is the exception' even in special statutes like the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. If the conditions in the special statute for the grant of bail are met, then bail should be granted. 13. Learned A.G.A./State Law Officer could not bring forth any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the applicant. 14. It is settled principle of law that the object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused at the trial. No material particulars or circumstances suggestive of the applicant fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like have been shown by learned A.G.A./State Law Officer. 15. 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 name of the applicant has been added subsequently out of suspicion only, 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. 16. Let the applicant- Pradeep Kumar, 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 pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 17. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 18. 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. Order Date :- 7.8.2025 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad