Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:22584 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 11011 of 2024 Appellant :- Islam And Another Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Markandey Rai,Pradeep Kumar Rai,Swatantra Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record. 2. Despite notice none appeared on behalf of opposite party no. 2. 3. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellants– Islam and Ishaq with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 05.10.2024 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Jaunpur in Second Bail Application No. 408 of 2024. 4. The appellants before this Court were accused persons in Sessions Trial No. 77 of 2015, (State Vs. Islam and Another) arising out of Case Crime No. 1157 of 2009, under Sections 147, 323, 325, 504, 506 I.P.C. & Section 3(1)(X) of SC/ST Act. An exemption application was moved on 18.01.2020 which was rejected by the learned trial court and non bailable warrant was issued against both the accused/appellants. Subsequently on 30.09.2024 they appeared before the court and taken into custody and since then they are languishing in jail. 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that the appellants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. They have not committed the present offence. Alleged offences are not attracted against them. Essential ingredients to establish an offence under SC/ST Act are also missing in this case. It is further submitted that the appellants before this Court are very poor persons and for the sake of their employment they had gone out side the State and that is why exemption application was moved on behalf of the accused/appellants and the learned trial court rejected the same and non bailable warrant was issued against the accused/appellants. It is further submitted that in the meanwhile Corona Pandemic-2019 became effective and the accused persons failed to appear before the trial court. It is next submitted that on 30.09.2024 subsequently they were arrested by the police. It is also submitted that for about 4 months they have been languishing in jail, while they had been granted bail on merits. 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. Appellants are in jail since 30.09.2024. 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. On the other hand, learned AGA opposing the prayer for bail submitted that the appellants committed the present offence having knowledge that the victim belonged to scheduled caste community. There is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order dated 05.10.2024. 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 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- Islam and Ishaq involved in Sessions Trial No. 77 of 2015, (State Vs. Islam and Another) arising out of Case Crime No. 1157 of 2009, under Sections 147, 323, 325, 504, 506 I.P.C. & Section 3(1)(X) of SC/ST Act, Police Station– Sarai Khwaja, District Jaunpur 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 :- 17.2.2025 Vikram Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad