Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:20422 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 10924 of 2024 Appellant :- Arun Singh Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Vipin Chandra Lal Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. Despite service of notice, none is present on behalf of respondent no.2. 2. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant - Arun Singh with the prayer to allow the appeal, set aside the bail rejection order dated 27.9.2024 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Kaushambi and release the appellant on bail in case crime no.20 of 2016 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 325 IPC and 3(1)X S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Sarai Akil, District Kaushambi. 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 21.2.2016 at about 6:00 P.M. when the informant was returning to home, on the way the accused persons Sunil Singh and Arun Singh hurled abuses and made caste related remarks and also wielded lathi upon the informant who sustained injury. The accused persons fled away from the spot. 5. 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 that the prosecution story is totally false and fabricated. It is also submitted that general role has been assigned to the appellant. Except the SC/ST Act, all the sections are under minor offence. Essential ingredients to constitute the offence under the SC/ST Act are missing in this case. It is also submitted that the co-accused Sunil Singh has been granted bail by the trial court itself, however, on the basis of same set of evidence, the bail of the present appellant has been rejected by the court concerned. 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), Kaushambi. 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 19.9.2024 having no criminal antecedents to his credit. 6. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposing the prayer for bail submitted that the appellant committed the present offence having knowledge that the victim belonged to S.C./S.T. Community. There is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order. 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, detention period of the appellant, 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 Arun Singh involved in case crime no.20 of 2016 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 325 IPC and 3(1)X S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Sarai Akil, District Kaushambi 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 :- 11.2.2025 ss Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad