Bail is a rule, imprisonment an exception; the right to liberty must be upheld unless substantial grounds justify denial.

JUDGMENT :

Krishan Pahal, J.

1. List has been revised.

2. Heard Sri Amit Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Deepak Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

3. As informed by learned AGA, notice to the informant has been served on 10.12.2024 but none is present on behalf of the informant even in the revised call.

4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 242 of 2024, under Sections 323, 366, 363, 120B, 506, 342, 376(2)(n) I.P.C. and Section 5/6 of the POCSO Act, Police Station Sinduriya, District Maharajganj, during the pendency of trial.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that another bail application having Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.3959 of 2025 was filed in the added sections as the Final Report (charge sheet) was submitted in those sections.

PROSECUTION STORY:

6. The applicant is stated to have enticed away the minor daughter of the informant on 29.05.20204 at about 5 a.m. and was seen taking her by the witnesses. Subsequently, he is stated to have raped her and had left her over at Maharajganj.

ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT :

7. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has nothing to do with the said offence.

8. The FIR is delayed by about three months and there is no explanation of the said delay caused.

9. The victim by her looks seems to be major, although as per her own statement, she was 16 years old but her father himself has narrated her age to be 17 years.

10. As per school certificate of class-Vth, her date of birth is stated to be 05.07.2007, as such her age has come out to be 17 years.

11. The said document is not admissible in the light of Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice (care and protection of children) Act.

12. The consent of the victim is but evident from the fact that the FIR itself states that the victim had taken away ornaments and Rs.40,000/- cash from her house, although, it is alleged that the applicant had forcibly taken away those ornaments and Rs.40,000/- cash from the victim.

13. The applicant himself is a youth aged about 21 years.

14. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. 15. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 22.09.2024. The applicant is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF STATE :

16. The bail application has been opposed but the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant could not be disputed.

CONCLUSION:

17. In light of the judgement of the Supreme Court passed in Niranjan Singh and another vs Prabhakar Rajaram Kharote and others, AIR 1980 SC 785 , this Court has avoided detailed examination of the evidence and elaborate documentation of the merits of the case as no party should have the impression that his case has been prejudiced. A prima facie satisfaction of case is needed but it is not the same as an exhaustive exploration of the merits in the order itself.

18. 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.

19. 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 .

20. Reiterating the aforesaid view t