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
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.
After adhering to the facts and arguments presented, the court was of the opinion that 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, the court granted bail to the applicant. The exact words as quoted by the bench are as follows, “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 person in detention during the trial is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused.”