HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 10749 of 2024 Court No. - 83 HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. Supplementary affidavit filed today and is taken on record. 2. This criminal appeal has been filed by the learned counsel for the appellant under Section 14-A (2) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for setting aside the impugned order dated 13.09.2024 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Kannauj in Bail Application No. UPKJ0100-4174- 2024 arising out of Case Crime No. 321 of 2024, under Sections 107 of BNS and Section 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Saurikh, District Kannauj. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant-applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant-applicant that co accused Kuldeep has already been granted bail by this court vide order dated 5.2.2025 in Criminal Appeal No. 9269 of 2024. It is further submitted that there are nine witnesses out of which seven witnesses have been examined and there is no chance of tampering with the prosecution witnesses. It is further submitted that the appellant is in jail since 25.7.2024 and has also explained the criminal history in paragraph no. 13 of the bail application. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 as well as AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the said fact. 5. 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. 6. 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 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 liable to be allowed. Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Arvind Singh, Krishna Murari Tripathi, Sushil Kumar Dubey Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Sanjeev Kumar Trivedi Bhole Singh .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) 7. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside. 8. Let the appellant Bhole Singh, involved in the aforesaid case crime number 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 cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. (iii) The appellant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(es). (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence. (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. (vi) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. (vii) The appellant will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. (viii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. 9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before the competent Court. 10. As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observations made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation made in this order. September 15, 2025 RavindraKSingh CRLA No. 10749 of 2024 2 (Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAVINDRA KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad