The main legal point established in the judgment is that the presumption of innocence lies in favor of the accused, and the object of bail is to secure appearance at trial. The judgment also emphasizes that deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment and that bail is the rule and jail is the exception.

JUDGEMENT/ORDER :

1. Petitioner/accused has sought indulgence of this court under the provisions of section 439 Cr.P.C for his enlargement on bail on the grounds, that he is a citizen of India and is entitled to all the privileges and fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution of India and the laws made there under concerning liberty of a person and life as guaranteed to him under Article 21 of the Constitution of India; he has been arrested on 02.04.2021 in FIR 63/2021 by the respondent for alleged commission of offences under Sections 489-B/489- D/120-B IPC; he filed an application before the court of Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate Jammu, who vide order dated 15.04.2021 rejected his bail application; he filed another bail application before the court of Ld. Principal Sessions Judge Jammu, which on transfer, was heard and decided by Ld. Additional Sessions Judge Jammu vide order dated 22.05.2021 by declining the relief to the petitioner; the charge-sheet stands filed against him and other three (3) accused persons who have been granted bail by the courts; he is a patient of depression and a schizophrenic and is on aggressive medication and is aggrieved of the order dated 22.05.2021, whereby, his plea for bail was rejected by the Ld. Additional Sessions Judge Jammu; he is innocent and law abiding citizen and has been falsely implicated and he has never committed any offence; his arrest and further incarceration would result in violation of his right to life guaranteed to him under Article 21 of the Constitution of India; it is true that society has a vital interest in grant or refusal of bail however it is equally true that the order granting or refusing the bail must reflect perfect balance between the conflicting interests, namely, sanctity of individual liberty and of the society; the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence is that presumption of innocence of an accused always lies in his favor until he is found guilty; seriousness of the charge is, no doubt, one of the relevant considerations while considering bail applications but that is not the only test or the factor; the provisions of Cr.P.C confer discretionary jurisdiction on criminal court to grant bail to accused pending trial or in the appeal against convictions since the jurisdiction is discretionary, it has to be exercised with great care and caution by balancing the valuable right and liberty of an individual and the interest of the society; the object of bail is to secure the appearance of accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail and the object is neither punitive nor preventative; deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment and the courts owe more than verbal respect to the principle that punishment begins after conviction and that every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried and found guilty; he undertakes to abide by all the conditions imposed by Hon'ble Court, if released on bail.

2. Respondent has opposed the bail on the grounds, that the offences committed by the petitioner/accused u/ss 489-B/489-D/120-B IPC of police station Nowabad Jammu in FIR No. 63/2021 are very serious and against the society at large; the liberty of an individual is subject to reasonable restrictions and as in the present case the petitioner/accused has committed gruesome act therefore, he does not deserve any leniency of bail; it is the prosecution story that on 02.04.2021, I/C PP Talab Tillo Jammu has forwarded a cognizable DD Extract to P/S Nowabad depicting therein that Complainant Davinder Kumar lodged a written complaint against accused persons Sachin and Rohit to the effect that complainant is running Pan/Cigarette Shop at Talab Tillo area, during the course of investigation, I/O visited the spot and prepared the site plan and recorded the statement of complainant and also seized a note of Rs. 500/- of fake Indian currency produced by the complainant whereby accused persons namely Sachin Kumar and Rohit Sharma were arrested and