Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:29078 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 11399 of 2024 Appellant :- Gagan Yadav @ Arjun Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Ankit Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. In the light of the of the order passed by this Court dated 15.01.2025 the I.O. of this case was summoned and by way of filing an affidavit the C.O., concerned, Kiran Pal Singh is present before the Court and it was brought to the notice of this Court that since after thorough investigation it was found that the victim of this case was not a minor girl and the I.O. has deleted Section 363 I.P.C. from the matter. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record. Compliance affidavit filed by the learned A.G.A. is taken on record. 3. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant - Gagan Yadav @ Arjun Yadav with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 23.10.2024 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Azamgarh in Bail Application No. - 1004822 of 2024 involved in Case Crime No. 149 of 2024 under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. & Section 3(1)da, 3(1)dha and 3(2)5 SC/ST Act, Police Station - Tahbarpur, District- Azamgarh. 4. The major prosecutrix was eloped by the present accused appellant along with the co-accused Ajay and when the girl was not discovered the matter was reported to the police. Now after closure of investigation charge sheet under Section 366, 376 I.P.C. & Section 3(1)da, 3(1)dha and 3(2)5 SC/ST was submitted. 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. Essential ingredients to establish an offence under SC/ST Act are also missing in this case. It is further submitted that the present is the matter of consensual relationship between the two major persons of opposite sex. The accused appellant never played any cheating to the prosecutrix and she on her own will had left her house and had gone with the accused appellant. It is further submitted that in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. it has been specifically stated by the victim of this case that initially the present appellant on false pretext of marriage took her to Delhi but now she herself does not want to marry with the accused appellant. She also admits that the physical relation was made and developed between the two with the consent of the prosecutrix. 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. Appellant is in jail since 6.7.2024 having no criminal antecedent. 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 AGA opposing the prayer for bail submitted that 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 dated 23.10.2024. 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, particularly, the statement of the victim made before the Court under Section 164 Cr.P.C., no criminal history of the appellant, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has 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 appellant is, hereby, set-aside. 10. Let the above named appellant involved in the aforesaid crime 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. 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. 12. The personal appearance of the above named office is exempted until otherwise directed by this Court. Order Date :- 3.3.2025 Fhd Digitally signed by :- FAHAD NIYAZ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad