The said principle has been reiterated by the Apex Court in Satyendra Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation and another

Applicant :- Smt Amtul And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Srivastava,Ashok Kumar Nigam,Mohd. Aslam Khan,Mohd. Mateen Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sikandar Khan Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

1. Heard Mr. Amit Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Sikandar Khan, learned counsel for the informant, Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the material on record.

2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants, Smt. Amtul and Harun with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No.447 of 2023, under sections 498A, 323, 302, 326, 120B IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station – Masoori, District –Ghaziabad, during pendency of trial.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He further submits that the applicants are sister-in-law (Jethani) and borther-in-law (Jeth) of the deceased. The other co-accused; Smt. Reshma and Tahir have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 10.05.2024 and 22.05.2024 passed in Cri. Misc. Bail Application No.18233 of 2024 and 18889 of 2024 respectively, copy of which orders have been passed on to the Court today, are kept on record and the case of the applicants stand similar footings. Hence the applicants are also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. He further submits that the applicants have no criminal history except the present case and is languishing in jail since 12.01.2024. In case, he is released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial by all means. Lastly, it is submitted that there is no chance of applicants fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses.

4. Per contra learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicants cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicants are released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail. However, they could not dispute the fact that the co- accused person has already been released on bail.

5. 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. A person's right to life and liberty, guaranteed by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, cannot be taken away simply because he or she 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 Apex Court in Satyendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022 (10) SCC 51. Learned AGA has not shown any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the applicant.

6. 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 for the State.

7. The object of the bail is to secure the attendance of the accused, the detention of the accused pending trial cannot be punitive in nature as there is presumption of innocence in favour of the accused person. Learned A.G.A. has not brought any facts and circumstances to demonstrate that the character of the accused-applicant(s) is such that his mere presence at large would intimidate the witness. Learned AGA for the State has not brought any fact or circumstances to indicate criminal history or antecedents of the applicant which would disentitle the applicant for Bail.

8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, the period of detention of the applicant for the alleged offence, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

9. Let the applicants involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:- (i) The applicants will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicants will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. (iv) The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. (v) The applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (vi) The applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. (vii) In the event, the applicants changes residential address, the applicant shall inform the court concerned about new residential address in writing. (viii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

10. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

11. It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case. Order Date :- 7.1.2025 Jitendra/- JITENDRA KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Applicant :- Smt Amtul And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Srivastava,Ashok Kumar Nigam,Mohd. Aslam Khan,Mohd. Mateen Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sikandar Khan Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

1. Heard Mr. Amit Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Sikandar Khan, learned counsel for the informant, Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the material on record.

2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants, Smt. Amtul and Harun with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No.447 of 2023, under sections 498A, 323, 302, 326, 120B IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station – Masoori, District –Ghaziabad, during pendency of trial.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He further submits that the applicants are sister-in-law (Jethani) and borther-in-law (Jeth) of the deceased. The other co-accused; Smt. Reshma and Tahir have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 10.05.2024 and 22.05.2024 passed in Cri. Misc. Bail Application No.18233 of 2024 and 18889 of 2024 respectively, copy of which orders have been passed on to the Court today, are kept on record and the case of the applicants stand similar footings. Hence the applicants are also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. He further submits that the applicants have no criminal history except the present case and is languishing in jail since 12.01.2024. In case, he is released on bail, they will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial by all means. Lastly, it is submitted that there is no chance of applicants fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses.

4. Per contra learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicants cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicants are released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail. However, they could not dispute the fact that the co- accused person has already been released on bail.

5. 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. A person's right to life and liberty, guaranteed by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, cannot be taken away simply because he or she 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 Apex Court in Satyendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2022 (10) SCC 51. Learned AGA has not shown any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the applicant.

6. 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 for the State.

7. The object of the bail is to secure the attendance of the accused, the detention of the accused pending trial cannot be punitive in nature as there is presumption of innocence in favour of the accused person. Learned A.G.A. has not brought any facts and circumstances to demonstrate that the character of the accused-applicant(s) is such that his mere presence at large would intimidate the witness. Learned AGA for the State has not brought any fact or circumstances to indicate criminal history or antecedents of the applicant which would disentitle the applicant for Bail.

8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, the period of detention of the applicant for the alleged offence, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

9. Let the applicants involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:- (i) The applicants will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicants will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. (iv) The applicants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. (v) The applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (vi) The applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. (vii) In the event, the applicants changes residential address, the applicant shall inform the court concerned about new residential address in writing. (viii) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

10. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

11. It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case. Order Date :- 7.1.2025 Jitendra/- JITENDRA KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad