Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:30013 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 10147 of 2024 Appellant :- Bablu Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Ashish Dwivedi,Durvijay Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. Notice has been served upon the respondent no.2 / informant. 2. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant - Bablu with the prayer to allow the appeal, set aside the bail rejection order dated 10.6.2024 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Chitrakoot and release the appellant on bail in S.S.T. No.112 of 2024 arising out of case crime no.248 of 2023 under Sections 308, 323, 324, 504, 506/34 IPC and 3 (2) 5 क, 3 (1) द, ध S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Mau, District Chitrakoot. 3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record. 4. Prosecution story, as unfolded in the F.I.R., is that on 30.10.2023 at about 7:00 P.M., when the father of the informant namely, Bacchilal was returning to home after feeding the cows, accused Hublal and present appellant Bablu of the same village started hurling abuses and caste related remarks upon his father and when he objected, on the exhortation of present appellant Bablu, accused Hublal made deadly assault upon his father with the aid of sharp-edged axe. F.I.R. was lodged and after investigation charge-sheet was submitted in this matter. 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to village partybandi. He has not committed the present offence. Alleged offences are not attracted against him. It is also submitted that the prosecution story is totally false and fabricated. Essential ingredients to constitute the offence under the SC/ST Act are missing in this case. It is also submitted that the appellant has been attributed the role of exhortation only. It is also submitted that P.W.1 Chukkilal, the son of the injured, has narrated in his testimony before the court that on exhortation of Bablu, the present appellant, the main accused Hublal made several blows of axe upon his father, the injured, who sustained serious injuries. It is also submitted that during course of investigation, the Investigating Officer has also collected evidence to the effect that the accused appellant Bablu was only making exhortation to main accused Hublal to make assault upon the injured but however he himself (the present appellant) in fact made no assault upon the injured. It is further submitted that the bail application of the appellant has been rejected in an illegal manner by the Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Chitrakoot. It is further submitted that the Court concerned while passing the impugned order did not take into account the facts and evidence available on record in right perspective and erred in passing the same. It is lastly submitted that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court. Appellant is languishing in jail since 28.05.2024 having no criminal antecedents to his credit. 6. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail. 7. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record including the impugned order carefully. 8. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The Court concerned erred in rejecting the bail application of the appellant. The impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set-aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed. 9. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside. 10. Let the appellant Bablu involved in case crime no.248 of 2023 (S.S.T. No.112 of 2024) under Sections 308, 323, 324, 504, 506/34 IPC and 3 (2) 5 क, 3 (1) द, ध S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Mau, District Chitrakoot be released on bail on 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 appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. (v) The appellant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 3.3.2025 ss Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad