Refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India: The High Court of Uttarakhand

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA FIRST BAIL APPLICATION NO. 22420 7th JUNE 2021 Between: Mohd Aazam S o Mohd. Hanif R o Village Jagganathpur P.S. Bazpur District Udham Singh Nagar and State of Uttarakhand. …Respondent Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. D.C.S. Rawat. Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. T.C. Aggarwal learned Deputy Advocate General for the State. Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma J. This bail application has been filed for grant of regular bail in connection with F.I.R. No.484 of 2020 registered with Police Station Bazpur District Udham Singh Nagar for the offence punishable under Sections 420 467 468 471 472 120 B of I.P.C. Section 66 C & 66 D of the Information Technology Act. On the secret information forged Ravanne royalty slip) and forged seal were recovered from the possession of Mohd Akram a co accused. The F.I.R. was registered on 01.11.2020 against the co accused Mohd. Akram. On the basis of the statement of co accused Mohd. Akram the present applicant was apprehended on 03.11.2020 and 14 forged Ravanne of State of Uttar Pradesh and one forged Ravanna of State of Uttarakhand were recovered from the shop namely Mona Online Service Devbhoomi. Heard Mr. D.C.S. Rawat the learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. T.C. Aggarwal learned Deputy Advocate General the State through video The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant crime he is an innocent person the name of the applicant came into light in the statement of co accused Mohd. Akram he is not owner of the shop namely Mona Online Service Devbhoomi nor he has any concern with the co accused Mohd. Akram no alleged forged articles were recovered from the possession of the present applicant the applicant has no criminal history he is a permanent resident of District Udham Singh Nagar he is in judicial custody since 04.11.2020 and the charge sheet has already been filed therefore there is no chance of tampering with the evidence. The learned Counsel appearing for the State opposed the bail application however he fairly conceded that the applicant has no criminal history. Bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception. Refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The object of keeping the accused 3 person in detention during the trial is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case there is no reason to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period therefore without expressing any opinion as to the merits of the case this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage. The bail application is allowed. Let the applicant be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions : i) The applicant shall attend the trial court regularly and he shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of this case. 10. It is clarified that if the applicant misuses or violates any of the conditions imposed upon him the prosecution will be free to move the court for cancellation of bail. ALOK KUMAR VERMA J. Dt: 7th June 2021 

Summary: The object of keeping the accused person in detention during the trial is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused. The above mentioned has been the premise that has been followed by the Uttarakhand high Court in the case of Mohd Aazam v. State of Uttarakhand [First Bail Application No. 2248 Of 2020] which was adjudged by the single judge bench comprising Justice Alok Kumar Verma on 7th June 2021. The facts of the case are as follows. The bail application was filed for grant of regular bail in connection with F.I.R. No.484 of 2020, registered with Police Station-Bazpur, District Udham Singh Nagar. On the secret information, forged Ravanne (royalty slip) and forged seal were recovered from the possession of Mohd Akram, a co-accused. On the basis of the statement of co-accused Mohd. 2 Akram, the present applicant was apprehended on 03.11.2020 and 14 forged Ravanne (royalty slip) of State of Uttar Pradesh and one forged Ravanna of State of Uttarakhand were recovered from the shop, namely, Mona Online Service Devbhoomi. It was submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant crime; he is an innocent person; the name of the applicant came into light in the statement of co-accused Mohd. Akram; he is not owner of the shop, namely, Mona Online Service Devbhoomi, nor he has any concern with the co-accused Mohd. Akram; no alleged forged articles were recovered from the possession of the present applicant. Furthermore the applicant has no criminal history. The learned Counsel appearing for the State opposed the bail application, however, he fairly conceded that the applicant has no criminal history.