Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:9249 Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 302 of 2025 Appellant :- Shiv Prasad Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Mayur Gautam Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Rohit Kumar Singh Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. Counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. today is taken on record. Heard Sri Mayur Gautam, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Sri Rohit Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 alongwith learned A.G.A. and perused the entire record. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 07.01.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Raebareli. It is submitted that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and he is aged about 73 years at present. He has not committed the present offence. It is further submitted that there is civil litigation between the parties that is the reason he has been implicated in the present case with allegation that he alongwith his son Hariom committed rape with the victim who was a married lady. It is further submitted that a case u/s 376 I.P.C. was lodged against the brother-in-law of the victim by the daughter-in-law of the appellant and in retaliation present case has been lodged against him. It is very unnatural that a father aged about 73 years and his son will commit rape with a lady together. Alleged offences under Section 376 I.P.C. are not attracted against him. No specific role has been assigned to the appellant. Entire allegations levelled in the F.I.R. and in the statement are false. 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. Learned counsel for the appellant also referred to the amended provisions of SC/ST Act. Appellant is in jail since 26.12.2024. 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. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 opposed the prayer as aforesaid. 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. 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 civil litigation pending between the parties and the F.I.R. lodged by daughter-in-law of the appellant against the brother-in-law of the victim, this 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 dated 07.01.2025 suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set- aside and the appeal is to be allowed. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside. Let the appellant- Shiv Prasad involved in Case No.690 of 2022 arising out of Case Crime No.388 of 2019, under Sections 376D I.P.C. and 3(2)(5) SC/ST Act, Police Station Harchandpur, District Raebareli, 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. 1. The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. 2. The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. 3. The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. 4. 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. 5. 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. 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 :- 13.2.2025 Ashok Gupta Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench