Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:20327 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 11047 of 2024 Appellant :- Prabhat Sharma Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Pankaj Sharma,Shiv Murti Kushwaha Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State and rejoinder affidavit filed on behalf of the appellant are 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 Prabhat Sharma with the prayer to allow the instant appeal, set aside the bail rejection order dated 23.10.2024 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Bulandshahar and release the appellant on bail in case crime no.268 of 2024 under Sections 376, 328, 406, 504 IPC and 3(2)5 S.C./S.T. Act, P.S. Arniya, District Bulandshahar. 3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the respondent no.2 and perused the entire record. 4. As per prosecution story, on the false pretext of marriage, the accused appellant called the victim of this case and after administering some intoxicant, made her unconscious and then physical relations were made with her. The accused appellant is further alleged to procure some obscene photographs / video of the said incident and on the basis of that he used to blackmail the victim and also took a huge amount of money from her. F.I.R. was lodged and after investigation charge-sheet was submitted in this matter. 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. Essential ingredients to constitute the offence under the SC/ST Act are missing. It is also submitted that the entire prosecution story is a bundle of forged facts. The accused appellant never made any physical relations with the victim of this case nor any promise to marry was made by him. It is also submitted that the real fact of the matter is that both the parties have some accounting dispute and by way of electronic transfer, several bank transfers have taken place between them, copies of which have been appended with the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. It is also submitted that only for the said reason of money, the victim of this case falsely implicated the appellant. It is also submitted that the medical evidence does not support the prosecution case at all. No obscene photograph / video was taken by the appellant nor he blackmailed the victim on the basis thereof. The appellant is having no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 28.9.2024. 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), Bulandshahar. It is further submitted that the Court below 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. 6. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the respondent no.2 vehemently opposed the present appeal but however no convincing reply has been made on the point of accounting dispute between the appellant and the victim which was made through bank transactions. 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 appellant has made out a case for bail. The Court below 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 Prabhat Sharma involved in case crime no.268 of 2024 under Sections 376, 328, 406, 504 IPC and 3(2)5 S.C./S.T. Act, P.S. Arniya, District Bulandshahar 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