Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:41505 Court No. - 80 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 728 of 2025 Appellant :- Vijay Yadav Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- R S Dubey,Savita Dubey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the appellant is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available 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-Vijay Yadav with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 16.01.2025 passed by the Special Judge SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Deoria in Bail Application No. 47 of 2025. 4. The prosecution story as unfolded in the F.I.R. is that on 28.10.2024 at 14:00 pm the accused persons seven in numbers came to the house of the informant and hurling abuses by caste related remarks, assault was made by them with lathi, danda and sharp edged weapons and some persons from the informant side sustained serious injuries. F.I.R. was lodged on the same day and now the charge-sheet has been 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 on account of village rivalry the present appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is also submitted that the informant side was itself aggressor and had made assault upon the accused persons and the matter was reported to the police by the accused side as well. It is further submitted that although one injured has sustained fracture but simple injuries were sustained by the other injured persons. It was also submitted that the alleged incident has not been seen by any of the independent witness. It is further submitted that appellant is having no criminal history to his credit. He is languishing in jail since 06.01.2025. The essential ingredients to constitute an offence under SC/ST Act are completely missing in this case. 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. 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. Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the present appeal but however, he could not explain the contradictions occurred in the F.I.R. as in the assailants who actually participated in the crime, the name of the present appellant was not disclosed although his name finds place in the array of accused persons. 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 role of assault not attributed to the present appellant in the F.I.R in clear terms, 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 appellant-Vijay Yadav involved in Case Crime No. 212 of 2024, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 351(3), 109(1), 117(2) of B.N.S. and Section 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Bhatparrani, District Deoria 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. Order Date :- 20.3.2025 Vikram Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad