High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:134079 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22885 of 2025
Legal Reasoning
Applicant :- Jitin Sirohi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Akash Tyagi,Neha Tyagi,Sandeep Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,M J Akhtar,Shahzad Alam Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Pankaj Kumar Tyagi, Advocate holding brief of Sri Akash Tyagi assisted by Sri Sandeep Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri V.M. Zaidi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri M.J. Akhtar, Sri Ashutosh Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 65 of 2025, under Sections 103, 115(2), 352, 351(2), 109, 191(2), 191(3), 190, 324(5), 326(g), 3(5), 333 BNS, Police Station- Baccharayun, District- J.P. Nagar (Amroha), during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have barged into the house of the informant on 08.03.2025 at about 05:30 PM and caused grievous injuries to him, his father and his mother. His father is stated to have succumbed to injuries later on. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. The applicant is not named in the FIR and only two accused persons, namely, Anil and Ritik are named in the said FIR. The FIR has been instituted by one of the injured persons and names of only two persons are mentioned in it, however, subsequently, on the next date, in the statement recorded under Section 180 BNSS, applicant has been nominated. The names of applicant and other co-accused persons have been added after legal consultation. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that there is a CCTV footage taken from the place of occurrence and it is stated that applicant has been found entering into the place of occurrence by breaking open the wall but the said allegations are per se false as there is no certificate under Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam. 7. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 01.05.2025 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. Per contra, learned Senior Counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that applicant was seen entering into the house of the informant in the CCTV footage but could not dispute the fact that the applicant is not named in the FIR and FIR has been instituted by one of the injured persons. 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 recapitulated 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 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”. 12. Learned counsel for the informant as well as 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. 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. 15. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and taking into consideration the fact that there is no certificate under Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam showing that it was indeed the applicant who was entering the house of the applicant coupled with the fact that applicant was not named in the FIR despite the fact that FIR has been instituted by one of the injured persons 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- Jitin Sirohi, 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 pressurize/intimidate 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 Karan Digitally signed by :- KARAN KUMAR RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Justice Krishan Pahal)