Bail is a rule, not a punishment; the presumption of innocence must be upheld unless proven guilty, with conditions set to ensure trial attendance.

JUDGMENT :

Krishan Pahal, J.

1. List has been revised.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Anit Kumar Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 608 of 2024, U/S 87, 64, 123 B.N.S., Police Station Shikohabad, District Firozabad, during the pendency of trial.

4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have enticed away the wife of the informant on 2.10.2024.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. It is stated that he has nothing to do with the said offence. It is stated that FIR is delayed by eight days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused.

6. It is further stated that the victim is major and is a married lady. She is the consenting party, as she has stated in her statement recorded u/s 183 B.N.S.S. that the applicant had spiked her drink and had left her at Subhash crossing. She has further stated that the FIR has been instituted on false facts.

7. 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. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 26.11.2024. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

8. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but has not disputed the fact that there is no criminal history of the applicant.

9. 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.

10. 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.

11. 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 .

12. Reiterating the aforesaid view the Supreme Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 INSC 595 has again emphasized 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”.

13. Learned AGA could not bring forth any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the applicant. 14. 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.

15. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and without expressing any opinion on the mer