Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:19911 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 10389 of 2024 Appellant :- Shyamnarayan Sahani Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Awaneesha Kumar,Mahesh Kumar Sahani,Narendra Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. By way of the present Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST Act the appellant has approached this Court against the second bail rejection order dated 15.7.2024 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Gorakhpur and to release the appellant on bail in case crime no. 68 of 2022 under Sections 323, 504, 302 IPC, Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Campierganj, District Gorakhpur. 3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned AGA and perused the entire record. None is present for the opposite party no.2 despite service of notice. 4. The previous criminal appeal filed by the appellant praying for bail and setting aside the bail rejection order passed by the Court concerned has been decided on merits by the coordinate Bench of this Court and it has been dismissed vide order dated 1.11.2023. 5. Delayed trial, incarceration period of the appellant and deposition of PW-1, which was not recorded at the time of disposal of first criminal appeal, are the new and additional grounds in this criminal appeal. 6. It is submitted that at the time of disposal of first criminal appeal by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 1.11.2023 the statement of PW-1 was not recorded before the trial court but subsequently his statement has been recorded by the learned trial court and there are material contradictions in his statement. It is further submitted that charges in the matter were framed on 29.7.2022 but so far only one prosecution witness has been examined before the Court. It is also submitted that the appellant is in jail since 24.3.2022 and has served out about three years incarceration period. The learned 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 lastly submitted that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court. 7. On the other hand, learned AGA opposing the prayer submitted that the appellant committed the present offence having knowledge that the deceased belonged to scheduled caste community. There is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order and appeal deserves to be dismissed. Previous appeal filed by the appellant has been dismissed on merits. 8. 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. 9. It appears from the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and from perusal of material on record that the Court concerned has properly considered the case of the appellant while deciding the bail application. Hence, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, role of the appellant, severity of punishment and the fact that case is running at the stage of evidence and a lot of evidence has yet to come, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has not made out a case for bail. The Court concerned passed a reasoned order while rejecting the bail application of the appellant. The impugned order does not suffer from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be affirmed and the appeal is liable to be dismissed. 10. Accordingly, the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is affirmed and the appeal is dismissed. 11. However, the trial court is expected to make all endeavours to decide the trial of this case expeditiously without granting any unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties. 12. It is made clear that the submissions / observation made in this order are only for deciding the bail application and the trial court shall not be influenced in any way with the said observations / submissions while deciding the trial. Order Date :- 11.2.2025 safi Digitally signed by :- MAHBOOB SAFI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad