Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:41394 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 482 of 2025 Appellant :- Ravindra Yadav @ Rana Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Praveen Kumar Singh,Shrikant Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. 1. Case called out. From Annexure No.7 of the counter affidavit, it is apparent that the notice to the opposite party No.2 has been served. However when the case is called out no one appeared on behalf of the opposite party No.2 to oppose the bail. Learned AGA is present in the Court. In the above background, the Court proceeded to hear the appeal. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State 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 order dated 01.01.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Pratapgarh in Bail Application No. 3537 of 2024, arising out of Case Crime No. 178 of 2024, under Sections 306, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(v), 3 (2) (va) of SC/ST Act, P.S.- Sangipur, District - Pratapgarh. 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 a bare perusal of FIR would show that there is no allegation based upon which Section 306 IPC can be attracted. He says that for the purposes of offence under Section 306 IPC, the prosecution has to allege and prove that the deceased was abetted/instigated by the accused immediately before committing suicide. Merely on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused which led or compelled the person to commit suicide, implication or conviction in terms of Section 306 IPC is not sustainable. In order to bring a case within the purview of Section 306 IPC there must be a case of suicide and in the commission of the said offence, the person who is said to have abetted the commission of suicide must have played an active role by an act of instigation or by doing certain act to facilitate the commission of suicide. This aspect is missing in this case. In this regard, learned counsel for the applicant placed reliance on the judgment of Apex Court passed in the case of Gurcharan Singh v. State of Punjab reported in (2020) 10 SCC 200. Learned counsel for the appellant has further placed reliance on the judgment of Apex Court passed in the case of Geo Varghese v. State of Rajasthan and Another reported in (2021) SCC Online SC 873. Learned counsel for the appellant based upon the observations made by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgment dated 05.03.2024 passed in the case of Prabhat Kumar Mishra Alias Prabhat Mishra vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2024) 3 SCC 665, submits that only based upon the suicide note, the judgment of conviction cannot be passed and for convicting an accused under Section 306 IPC, the prosecution is under obligation to prove essential ingredients indicated under Sections 306 and 107 IPC. In these circumstances, the appellant is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed. 6. 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. 7. 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. 8. Upon due consideration of above facts and circumstances 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. 9. Order dated 01.01.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Pratapgarh in Bail Application No. 3537 of 2024, arising out of Case Crime No. 178 of 2024, under Sections 306, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3 (2) (v), 3(2) (va) of SC/ST Act, P.S. - Sangipur, District - Pratapgarh is hereby set aside. 10. Let the appellant- Ravindra Yadav @ Rana Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two reliable sureties each 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 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. 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 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. Order Date :- 18.7.2025 ML/- Digitally signed by :- MUNNA LAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- MUNNA LAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench