JUDGMENT : KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. Supplementary affidavit filed today by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Smt. Abhilasha Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Jai Kishan, Advocate holding brief of Sri Vipin Kumar, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Ram Mohit Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 149 of 2024, under Sections 306, 452, 354 of I.P.C. Police Station - Kotwali Dehat, District - Etah, during the pendency of trial. PROSECUTION STORY: 4. The allegations against the applicant is that he has barged into the house of the deceased person, who is newly married lady, on 27.04.2024 and outraged her modesty. The matter was reported to the police station on 28.04.2024 but the matter was settled with the intervention of the persons of the locality. 5. Peeved by the said compromise, the deceased person is stated to have committed suicide by hanging her to the ceiling within the precincts of the house of her in-laws in the same night of 27.04.2024 at 21:29 hours. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT: 6. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. 7. No ingredients of Sections 306 & 107 of IPC are fulfilled. 8. The applicant himself is a youth aged about 22 years. 9. 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. 10. The applicant is languishing in jail since 27.05.2024, having no criminal history to his credit, deserves to be released on bail. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF INFORMANT/STATE: 11. The bail application has been opposed on the ground that the deceased was a newly married lady and the FIR has been instituted by the SHO of the police station concerned and there is no occasion for him to falsely implicate the innocent person, as such, the applicant is not entitled for bail. CONCLUSION: 12.
The bail application has been opposed on the ground that the deceased was a newly married lady and the FIR has been instituted by the SHO of the police station concerned and there is no occasion for him to falsely implicate the innocent person, as such, the applicant is not entitled for bail. CONCLUSION: 12. 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. 13. 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 reiterated by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors. 2022 INSC 690. 14. 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.” 15. Learned AGA could not bring forth any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the applicant. 16. 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. 17. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and also the fact that there is no overt act assigned to the applicant regarding the commissioning of abetment of suicide, I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed. 18.
17. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and also the fact that there is no overt act assigned to the applicant regarding the commissioning of abetment of suicide, I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed. 18. Let the applicant-Devesh Kumar, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence. (ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 19. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 20. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.