Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:134669 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27434 of 2025 Applicant :- Prem Shankar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised. Supplementary affidavit filed today by the
learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.
2. Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Arun Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the material placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 0345 of 2023, under Sections 302, 420, 201, 475, 120-B of IPC, Police Station - Rehra, District - Amroha, during the pendency of trial.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. He is not named in the FIR. His name has come up in the confession of the informant recorded before police. The said statement has no evidentiary value in the eyes of law.
5. Learned counsel has also stated that criminal history of one case assigned to the applicant stands explained in the supplementary affidavit filed in court today. The applicant is languishing in jail since 11.05.2025 and deserves to be released on bail. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial.
6. Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the
learned counsel for the applicant.
7. In the case of Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, (2020) 11 SCC 648, the Supreme Court has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused by itself
cannot be a basis for refusal of 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 Ors., 2022 INSC
690.
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. 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.
12. Learned AGA could not bring forth any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the applicant.
13. 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 AGA.
14. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case,
submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and also considering the fact that the applicant is not named in the FIR and his name has come up in the confessional statement of the informant which has no evidentiary value in the eyes of law, I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is
allowed.
15. Let the applicant- Prem Shankar, 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 will not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant will not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed.
16. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
17. 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:- 8.8.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad