Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:35479 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 590 of 2025 Appellant :- Ajay Kumar Saini Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Ashok Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J. 1. It is evident from the record that notice is already served on the respondent no. 2, but no one has put in appearance on his behalf today. Therefore, this appeal is being decided with the assistance of learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant seeking following reliefs:- "To set aside the impugned order dated 18.10.2024 passed by learned Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Barabanki in Bail Application No.3429/2024, vide Case Crime No. 335/2024 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504 and 506 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 at Police Station- Fatehpur, District- Barabanki." 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant, who is purchaser of the property in question, has falsely been implicated in the present case and he was cheated by the seller. He further submits that the sellers/ witnesses of the sale deed, namely, Navneet Kumar Saini and Jai Kumar Saini have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide orders dated 03.10.2024 and 23.01.2025 passed in Criminal Appeals Nos.2944 of 2024 and 3941 of 2024, respectively (the said bail orders are annexed as Annexure Nos.6 & 7). The other co- accused/seller, namely, Uttam Kumar alias Uttam Kumar Saini has also been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 06.03.2025 passed in Crl. Appeal No.3255 of 2024. He next submits that the charge-sheet has already been submitted by the Investigating Officer. He also submits that learned trial Court rejected the bail application without considering the evidence in correct perspective. He vehemently submits that the applicant, who is in jail since 08.10.2024, is a bona fide purchaser and due to his ill health, he was hospitalized in Hospital of the District Jail. Lastly, he requests that the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appellant is entitled for bail. 5. The photocopy of the bail order of Uttam Kumar @ Uttam Kumar Saini i.e. of date 06.03.2025 placed before this Court by learned counsel for the appellant is taken on record. 6. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the prayer of the appellant and submits that there is no illegality in the impugned order passed by learned trial Court. However, he does not dispute the fact that he co-accused/sellers have already been granted bail by this Court. 7. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and going through the contents of the impugned order, F.I.R. as well as other relevant documents, it is evident that applicant, who is in jail since 08.10.2024, is a bona fide purchaser and the co-accused/sellers, namely, Navneet Kumar Saini, Jai Kumar Saini and Uttam Kumar @ Uttam Kumar Saini have already been enlarged on bail. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the impugned order is liable to the set aside and the appellant is entitled for bail. 8. Resultantly, in view of the above facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the fact that the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, the appeal has substance and it is accordingly allowed. The impugned order dated 18.10.2024 passed by learned Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Barabanki in Bail Application No.3429/2024 is hereby set aside. 9. Let the appellant- Ajay Kumar Saini involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:- (i) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iii) In case, the appellant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the appellant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) 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. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the appellant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 10. Office is directed to communicate this order to the trial court, forthwith. Order Date :- 12.6.2025 Satish Digitally signed by :- SATISH KUMAR BHARATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench