Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:77070 Court No. - 80 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 957 of 2025 Appellant :- Hanif Ansari And Another Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Abhilasha Singh,Ashutosh Yadav,Mohd. Aslam Khan,Mohd. Mateen Khan,Shyam Lal Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and perused the record. 3. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (hereinafter referred to as SC/ST Act) has been preferred by the appellants Hanif Ansari and Nizam with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 03.12.2024 passed by the leaned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Rampur and to release them on bail in Case Crime No. 541 of 2024, under Sections 109(1), 115(2), 352, 351(3), 324(2), 117(2) of B.N.S. and 3(1) (Da), 3(1) (Dha), 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act, Police Station Tanda, District Rampur. 4. The prosecution story, as unfolded in the F.I.R., is that on 02.11.2024 at about 10.30 A.M. water pipe of the informant was damaged by motorcycle of the main accused persons Hanif Ansari and Sahil and sudden quarrel took place between two parties wherein the main accused persons made an assault by Fawara and Kudal upon the informant and his brother and father with an intention to kill them. The injured persons sustained injuries and they were hurled abuses by caste related remarks. They were medically examined and F.I.R. was lodged. 5. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that the appellants are innocent, they have not committed the alleged offence but they have been falsely implicated in this case. Alleged offences are not attracted against them. It is further submitted that there was no intention on the part of the appellants to kill the injured persons and it was sudden quarrel between both the parties. It is next submitted that no specific role has been assigned to any of the appellants to make assault upon any of the injured persons. It is also submitted that although the injured Prabhakar in his statement given before the Investigating Officer has stated that Nizam and Hanif Ansari made assault upon the injured persons by Fawara and Kudal but as a matter of fact, no serious injuries have been caused to the injured persons. In the injury report of the injured Jaswant fracture has been found on 8th and 9th ribs of right side of chest but doctor in his statement recorded under Section 180 B.N.S. by the Investigating Officer has nowhere stated that the injuries caused to the injured Jaswant were grievous and dangerous to life. No other injured has sustained serious injury. It is next submitted that the trial Court 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 also submitted that the appellants have no criminal history to their credit and they are languishing in jail since 03.11.2024. It is lastly submitted that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellants suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court. 6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 vehemently opposed the present appeal and it has been submitted that there are three injured persons and all the injured persons have corroborated the prosecution version. It is further submitted that the injured persons have been insulted and hurled abuses by caste related remarks by the accused appellants. 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, keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, incarceration period of the appellants and no criminal history of the accused appellants, the Court is of the opinion that the appellants have made out a case for bail. The trial Court erred in rejecting the bail application. The impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set-aside and the appeal is to be allowed. 9. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellants is, hereby, set-aside. 10. Let the appellants- Hanif Ansari and Nizam involved in the aforesaid case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy 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 appellants will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The appellants will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The appellants will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. (iv) The appellants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected. (v) The appellants 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 them 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 :- 12.5.2025 Rmk. Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad