Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:8293 Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 296 of 2025 Appellant :- Mursheed @ Mo. Murseed And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Suresh Chandra Goswami,Abhishek Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. As per instruction of learned A.G.A. notice has been served on the complainant. 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 20.12.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act, Barabanki. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, as well as the learned AGA and perused the entire record. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that the appellants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. They have committed no offence. Further submitted that the child said to be converted was handed over to the owner of the restaurant by the appellants for job and later on, the owner of restaurant converted the respondent (child), therefore, appellants are innocent and have never intended to convert the child from Hindu to Muslim. There is no any criminal antecedent against the appellants. 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. Appellants are in jail since 06.12.2024. It is lastly submitted that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellants suffer from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court. On the other hand, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail. 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, this Court is of the opinion that the appellants have made out a case for bail. The Court below 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. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellants are set-aside. Let the appellants Mursheed @ Mo. Murseed and Riyasat Ali @ Riyasad Ali involved in Case Crime No. 1111 of 2024, under Sections 3(5), 351(3) B.N.S. and Section 3/5(3) U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Religious Conversion Act, 2021 and Section 3(2) (V) SC/ST Act, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Barabanki 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. 1. The appellants will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. 2. The appellants will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. 3. The appellants will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. 4. The appellants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected. 5. The appellants 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 them 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 :- 10.2.2025 Anurag Singh Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench