Bail should be granted when the trial is delayed and the offence is not punishable by death or life imprisonment, upholding the principle that "bail is a rule and jail is exception" and the right to personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

ORDER

1. RULE.

Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent-State.

2. The present application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.11214032251426 of 2025 registered with Mandvi Police Station, Surat Rural for the offences punishable under Section 75 and 79 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short “IPC”) / The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”) and Section Section 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act.

3. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that the applicant has nothing to do with the offence and he is falsely implicated in the offence. The applicant is in jail since 07.11.2025. It is further submitted that, considering the nature of the offence, the applicant may be granted regular bail with the imposition of suitable conditions.

4. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed grant of regular bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence. Therefore, the present application may be dismissed.

5. While granting bail, the Court has to consider the involvement of the accused in the alleged offence, the jurisdiction to grant bail has to be exercised on the basis of the well settled principles having regard to the facts and circumstances of each case and the following factors are to be taken into consideration while considering an application for bail:

(i) the nature of accusation and the severity of the punishment and the nature of the materials relied upon by the prosecution;

(ii) reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses and threat to the complainant or the witnesses;

(iii) reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the time of trial or the likelihood of his abscondence;

(iv) character behaviour and standing of the accused and the circumstances which are peculiar to the accused;

(v) larger interest of the public or the State and similar other considerations are required to be considered.

6. I have heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and perused the investigation papers. Following aspects have been considered:

(1) The applicant is in jail since 07.11.2025.

(2) Charge-sheet is filed and trial is yet to be commenced;

(3) Considering the provisions of Sections 75 and 79 of the BNS Act and Sections 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act, it appears that the punishment prescribed is up to five years only.

(4) No possibility of tampering the evidence.

(5) Now, nothing required to discover or recover from the accused, and there is no possibility of proceeding with the trail in the near future.

(6) The offense is not punishable by life imprisonment or the death penalty.

7. This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra vs. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in [2012]1 SCC 40 as well as in the case of Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors vs. Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in (1978)1 SCC 240. Obviously, the conclusion of trial will take time and keeping the accused behind the bars is nothing but amounts to pre-trial conviction and therefore, considering the celebrated principle of bail jurisprudence is that “bail is a rule and jail is exception” as well as the concept of personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, present application deserves consideration.

8. In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations made against the applicant/s in the FIR, without discussing the evidence in detail, prima facie, this Court is of the