Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:44731 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 445 of 2025 Appellant :- Pramod Kumar Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Yogendra Singh,Mahesh Swaroop Yadav,Sushil Kumar Singh,Trishita Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Mohammad Aslam Siddiqui,Shailendra Kumar Tiwari,Vinod Kumar Pandey Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. 1. Heard Shri Yogendra Singh, Ms. Trishita Singh and Shri Sushil Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the appellant, Shri Satendra Nath Verma, learned counsel for opposite party no.2, Shri Ajay Kumar Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short 'SC/ST Act') against the impugned order dated 07.01.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Barabanki in Bail Application No.4185 of 2024, arising out of Case Crime No.500 of 2024, under Sections 69, 351(3), 352 of B.N.S. & Section 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha), 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Masauli, District- Barabanki. 3. While pressing the appeal, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the allegation in the FIR against the appellant is to the effect that on the pretext of false promise of marriage the appellant established physical relations with her, thus, if the case of prosecution is taken on its face value then in that eventuality, possibility of conviction of appellant is bleak in view of law settled by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgment(s) rendered in the case of Deepak Gulati vs. State of Haryana, (2013) 7 SCC 675; Sonu @ Subhash Kumar vs. State of U.P. and Another, (2021) 7 SCC; Mandar Deepak Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra and Another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 2110 and Amol Bhagwan Nehul vs. State of Maharashtra and another, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1230. 4. It is further submitted that statement of the victim has already been recorded before the trial court. 5. It is further submitted that the appellant, having no criminal history, is languishing in jail since 19.12.2024. In these circumstances, the present appeal is liable to be allowed and the impugned order may be set aside and the appellant be enlarged on bail. 6. Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 as well as learned A.G.A. for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail, however, they could not dispute the aforesaid contentions of counsel for the appellant. 7. Considered the submissions advanced by the counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for opposite party no.2, learned A.G.A. for the State and all the relevant documents placed on record. 8. Upon due consideration of the impugned order, facts of the case indicated in the FIR according to which the appellant established physical relations with the victim after assuring her to solemnize marriage as also the observations made by Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgments, referred above, including the fact that the statement of the victim has already been recorded before the trial court and now the main witness of the prosecution could not be influenced by the appellant as she has already been examined, as also the fact that the appellant is in jail since 19.12.2024 and chances of conviction of the appellant in the instant case, this Court finds that the present appeal is liable to be allowed. Accordingly, it is allowed. 9. Order dated 07.01.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Barabanki in Bail Application No.4185 of 2024, arising out of Case Crime No.500 of 2024, under Sections 69, 351(3), 352 of B.N.S. & Section 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha), 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Masauli, District- Barabanki is hereby set aside. 10. Let the appellant- Pramod Kumar Singh be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions :- (i) The appellant shall cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial. (iii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(s). (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 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 shall 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. 11. 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 12. As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observation(s) 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(s) made in this order. Order Date :- 1.8.2025 Anand/- Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench