HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27584 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ram Mohit Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.222 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 103(1), 115(2), 352 and 351(2) B.N.S., Police Station Lalauli, District Fatehpur, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant alongwith six other co-accused persons is stated to have assaulted and caused injuries to the brother of the informant Ram Prasad alongwith his sister Prem Dulari and father Shivbaran on 13.10.2024 at about 7:00 a.m. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by more than six hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused, although it indicates that the applicant was carrying a lathi in his hand and co-accused Rajban was carrying an axe, but the injured person Prem Dulari does not mention as to which of the two accused persons was carrying an axe or lathi. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that the said inconsistency speaks volume of false implication. A false recovery of a lathi Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajay Kumar Srivastava, Sanjeev Kumar Sahu Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ravi Nishad @ Ravindra Kumar Nishad .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) has been foisted on the applicant. Only one injury has been found on the vital part of the deceased person i.e. his cranium, otherwise the injuries are simple in nature. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 15.10.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant could not be disputed. 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 recapitulated 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 emphasised 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 A.G.A./State Law Officer could not bring forth any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the applicant. 12. 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 BAIL No. 27584 of 2025 2 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. 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 fact that there is general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons including the applicant, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima-facie 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- Ravi Nishad @ Ravindra Kumar Nishad, 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. 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 7, 2025 (Ravi Kant) BAIL No. 27584 of 2025 3 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad