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

HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J.

1. List revised. None appears on behalf of the first informant to oppose the bail application.

2. Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Pal, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arimardan Yadav, learned AGA for the State Respondent, and perused the material on record.

3. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case crime No. 299 of 2023, under Sections 304, 323, 504 I.P.C., P.S. Kundarki, District Moradabad, during the pendency of the trial.

4. As per allegation in the FIR lodged on 19.12.2023 at about 23:13 hours against three named accused including the applicant, on 07.12.2023, the informant's father intervention in the fight between Jeeshan and the applicant (Ramveer), annoyed by which the accused persons after using abusive language assaulted him due to which he expired.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. As per post-mortem report cause of death is as a result of ante-mortem head injury. Two injuries are shown when the injured was examined on 07.12.2023 which is swelling 6cmx3cm on left side forehead just above the left eyebrow and lacerated wound 6cmx0.5cm muscle deep on mid line tip of skull 9cm above from left ear with swelling around the wound in an area of 7cmx4cm. As per statement of independent witness Mishri, Dharamveer along with Rahul 2 BAIL No. 25289 of 2024 have been assigned general role of causing injury whereas the applicant (Ramveer) is stated to have been assigned the role of causing injury to the informant's father by Saria due to which he sustained head injuries and expired. He submits that applicant has no criminal history except the present one. Moreover, there is no prospect of trial of the present case being concluded in near future. It is further submitted that the co-accused Dharamveer has been granted bail by the Court vide order dated 10.04.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 9083 of 2024, therefore, the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail. He submits that the applicant is languishing in jail since 20.12.2023 and in case he is enlarged on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and co-operate in trial and there is no chance of applicant's fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses.

6. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, however, he could not dispute the fact that the co-accused has already been released on bail.

7. 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.

8. 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. 3 BAIL No. 25289 of 2024

9. 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 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 dis-entitle the applicants for bail.

10. 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.

11. Let the applicant, Ramveer, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his 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 applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. (iv) The applicant 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 applicant 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 applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. (vii) In the event, the applicant changes residential address, the applicant shall inform the court concerned about new residential address in writing. 4 BAIL No. 25289 of 2024 (viii) In case, the applicant 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 applicant fails 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.

12. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. 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. September 16, 2025 (Ashutosh Srivastava,J.) PAWAN KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J.

1. List revised. None appears on behalf of the first informant to oppose the bail application.

2. Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Pal, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arimardan Yadav, learned AGA for the State Respondent, and perused the material on record.

3. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case crime No. 299 of 2023, under Sections 304, 323, 504 I.P.C., P.S. Kundarki, District Moradabad, during the pendency of the trial.

4. As per allegation in the FIR lodged on 19.12.2023 at about 23:13 hours against three named accused including the applicant, on 07.12.2023, the informant's father intervention in the fight between Jeeshan and the applicant (Ramveer), annoyed by which the accused persons after using abusive language assaulted him due to which he expired.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. As per post-mortem report cause of death is as a result of ante-mortem head injury. Two injuries are shown when the injured was examined on 07.12.2023 which is swelling 6cmx3cm on left side forehead just above the left eyebrow and lacerated wound 6cmx0.5cm muscle deep on mid line tip of skull 9cm above from left ear with swelling around the wound in an area of 7cmx4cm. As per statement of independent witness Mishri, Dharamveer along with Rahul 2 BAIL No. 25289 of 2024 have been assigned general role of causing injury whereas the applicant (Ramveer) is stated to have been assigned the role of causing injury to the informant's father by Saria due to which he sustained head injuries and expired. He submits that applicant has no criminal history except the present one. Moreover, there is no prospect of trial of the present case being concluded in near future. It is further submitted that the co-accused Dharamveer has been granted bail by the Court vide order dated 10.04.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 9083 of 2024, therefore, the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail. He submits that the applicant is languishing in jail since 20.12.2023 and in case he is enlarged on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and co-operate in trial and there is no chance of applicant's fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses.

6. Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, however, he could not dispute the fact that the co-accused has already been released on bail.

7. 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.

8. 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. 3 BAIL No. 25289 of 2024

9. 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 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 dis-entitle the applicants for bail.

10. 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.

11. Let the applicant, Ramveer, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his 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 applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. (iv) The applicant 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 applicant 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 applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court. (vii) In the event, the applicant changes residential address, the applicant shall inform the court concerned about new residential address in writing. 4 BAIL No. 25289 of 2024 (viii) In case, the applicant 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 applicant fails 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.

12. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. 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. September 16, 2025 (Ashutosh Srivastava,J.) PAWAN KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad