Bail should be granted unless exceptional circumstances exist; presumption of innocence prevails until proven guilty.

JUDGMENT :

Krishan Pahal, J.

1. List has been revised.

2. Learned A.G.A. has informed that notice to the informant has been served on 13.12.2024.

3. Heard Sri Vinod Kumar Yadav, Advocate holding brief of Sri Umendra Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Anit Kumar Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.420 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 65(1), 87, 74, 115(2) B.N.S. and 3/4(2) POCSO Act , Police Station- Kanth, District- Shahajahanpur, during the pendency of trial.

PROSECUTION STORY:

5. The FIR was instituted against the applicant of having enticed away the minor daughter of the informant aged about 13 years, a student of Class-8th.

ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT:

6. The applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case.

7. There is no date and time of offence mentioned in the FIR. The FIR was instituted after much delay on 20.8.2024 at 07:25 p.m.

8. The victim is a consenting party as is but evident from her statement recorded U/s 183 B.N.S.S., whereby she has stated that she was forcibly taken by the applicant from her house by gagging her mouth to a car, whereby, the applicant had paid Rs. 3 lakhs to the person driving the said car and had taken her all the way to Maharashtra and married her.

9. The applicant is stated to have forcibly established corporeal relationship with her. Subsequently, the victim was told by the applicant that her parents had instituted an FIR against him, as such, she was dropped at the town by bus.

10. The victim by her looks seems to be major, although, as per the school certificate she is stated to be 15 years old.

11. 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. 12. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 24.2.2024 and 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/OPPOSITE PARTY:

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

CONCLUSION:

14. 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.

15. 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.

16. 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 .

17. 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”.

18. Learned AGA could not bring forth any exceptional