The right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution is paramount in granting bail, especially when trial delays are uncertain.

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Babloo Pant Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Shiv Kumar Singh Court No. - 70 HON'BLE SANTOSH RAI, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant; learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant Ravindra Kumar with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 87 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3), 333, 109(1) of BNS , Police Station Sakrar, District Jhansi during pendency of trial.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He further submits that F.I.R. has been lodged against four persons including applicant and general and common role has been assigned to the applicant and other co-accused persons. He further submits that statement of injured Mahesh and Karan have been recorded and they have not assigned any specific role against the applicant. He further submits that as per F.I.R. version, applicant is alleged to have caused incised wound on the chest of the applicant, but both the injured have not specified any role to the applicant, rather, they have stated that four accused persons caused injury. He further submits that sabbal is said to be recovered during the course of investigation, and there is no reliable independent witness was present at the time of recovery of sabbal. He further submits that all the three accused persons have been enlarged on bail by the trial court. He further submits that a concocted and false story has been set up by the prosecution whereas the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. He further submits that nothing incriminating has been recovered from the possession of the applicant. He further submits that criminal history of 8 cases of the applicant has been explained in para no. 2 of supplementary affidavit filed in support of the bail application. He further submits that trial is not likely to be concluded in near future. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. Applicant is languishing in jail since

08.06.2025.

4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. He further contended that charge-sheet has already been filed in the instant matter. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

5. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, bail application is allowed.

6. Considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs. Directorate of Enforcement , 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677, considering 5- 6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two new reliable heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the cou