HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 167 of 2025 Court No. - 11 HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J. 1. Case called out. No one appeared on behalf of the private opposite party Nos. 3 and 4 despite service of notice, as appears from the office report dated 21.03.2025 and 14.08.2025. Learned AGA is present for the State. In these circumstances and also taking note of the order of this Court dated 18.08.2025, which says "It is made clear that on the next date of listing, the case would not be adjourned on any ground including the illness/out of station slip of the counsel appearing for the private opposite parties and it would be heard and decided, the Court proceeded to hear the instant bail appeal on merits. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the record. 3. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 against the impugned order dated 07.11.2024 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Sultanpur in Bail Application No.2471 of 2024, arising out of FIR/Case Crime No.278/2024, under Section - 109, 352, 118(2) of BNS, 2023 and Section 3(1) (da), (dha) and 3 (2)(5) of SC/ST Act, Police Station - Gauriganj, District - Amethi. 4. While pressing the instant appeal, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. 5. He further stated that if the story of the prosecution as indicted in the F.I.R. is taken on its face value, then in that eventuality ultimately the case of the prosecution would fall under Section 117 of BNS, which is akin to Section 325 I.P.C., and not under Section 109 of BNS, which is akin to Section 307 IPC, as on account of colliding with the train hand of the brother of the informant was amputated. 6. In continuation of the aforesaid, it is stated that if the statement of the injured Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Manoj Kumar, Abhiuday Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Gaurishankar Kashyap .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) Sandeep Saroj, brother of the informant, annexed at page No.76, would indicate that informant who claims to be present at spot in fact was not present and the same also indicates that initially some hot talk took place between the injured and Rizwan and thereafter the accused hurled abuses and also assaulted the injured and when injured tries to save himself collided with the train in night of 25th August, 2024 and after sustaining injury he implicated the appellant and others. 7. It is further stated that appellant who is having no criminal history is in jail since 29.08.2024 and taking note of the period of incarceration as also the facts of the case the appellant is entitled to be released on bail and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed. 8. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant, however, he could not dispute the above contentions made by the appellant's counsel. 9. Considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. and gone through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R., as well as other relevant documents. 10. Upon due consideration of above facts and circumstances including that incident occurred without premeditation of mind as also the possibility of false implication and keeping in view the fact that the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, this Court is of the view that the appeal has substance and it is accordingly, allowed. 11. Order dated 07.11.2024 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Sultanpur in Bail Application No.2471 of 2024, arising out of FIR/Case Crime No.278/2024, under Section - 109, 352, 118(2) of BNS, 2023 and Section 3(1) (da), (dha) and 3 (2)(5) of SC/ST Act, Police Station - Gauriganj, District - Amethi is hereby set aside. 12. Let the appellant - Gaurishankar Kashyap be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two reliable sureties, out of which one should be of family member/close relatives of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to following additional conditions :- (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 CRLA No. 167 of 2025 2 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. 13. In case of default of above conditions it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. 14. 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 11, 2025 ML/- CRLA No. 167 of 2025 3 (Saurabh Lavania,J.) Digitally signed by :- MUNNA LAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench