Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:19793 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 10666 of 2024 Appellant :- Govardhan Singh Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Brajesh Kumar Solanki,Samrat Vikram Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant - Govardhan Singh with the prayer to set aside the order dated 13.9.2024 passed by learned Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Kaushambi in Case Crime No. 661 of 2022, under Sections 420, 406 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(5ka) and 3(1)(dha) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station - Manjhanpur, District-Kaushambi and release the appellant on bail. 3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He has not committed the present offence. Alleged offences are not attracted against him. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant and the informant of this case are the Tempo drivers and some money was taken earlier by the informant from the appellant and a part payment was subsequently made by him and these transactions were video recorded. It is also submitted that some amount of money has already been returned by the appellant to the informant. He is in jail since 13.9.2024. Criminal history of the appellant has been sufficiently explained. 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. The impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court. 5. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer and submitted that Rs. 75,000/- were taken by the appellant from the informant by playing fraud with him and the said transaction was video recorded. The appellant committed the present offence having knowledge that the victim belonged to scheduled caste community. There is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order. 6. 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. 7. 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, and the fact that some money has been returned by the appellant to the informant of this case, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The Court below 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. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside. 8. Let the aforesaid appellant involved in 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 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. 9. 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 :- 11.2.2025/safi Digitally signed by :- MAHBOOB SAFI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad