Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:26802 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 455 of 2025 Applicant :- Santosh Singh Alias Santosh Kumar Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Anothers Counsel for Applicant :- Amar Nath Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mohammad Nauman Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of opposite party no.1 & and learned counsel for complainant, opposite party no.2. 3. First Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with regard to Case Crime no.316 of 2022 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 427, 452 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)द, 3(1)ध, 3(2) 5 क of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, P.S. Mandhata, District Pratapgarh. 4. As per contents of F.I.R., the incident is said to have taken place on 14.09.2022 at about 8.00 A.M. when applicant along with co-accused is said to have attacked informant and his family members due to illegal construction of Chak Marg. Caste related epithets were also allegedly made by applicant and co-accused. 5. Learned Additional Government Advocate at the very outset along with learned counsel for informant have opposed anticipatory bail application with submission that applicant is not co-operating during course of trial due to which bailable warrant has been issued against him. Learned counsel for informant has also placed reliance on order passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Vijay Pratap Singh, who was co-accused and whose anticipatory bail application bearing CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2131 of 2024 has been rejected on ground that it is not maintainable considering the bar under Section 18 of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 6. Learned counsel for applicant has refuted the submissions advanced by learned counsel for opposite parties with submission that Section 18 of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is not an absolute bar in maintainability of an anticipatory bail application and it is only in case the Court comes to a prima facie satisfaction that the ingredients of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act are made out, that the application is liable to be rejected. It is submitted that a bare perusal of F.I.R. will indicate that Sections imputed against applicant under Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act are not made out. 7. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of material on record, it however appears that coordinate bench of this Court has rejected Anticipatory Bail Application of co-accused on the same set of allegations. It is also intimated that applicant is not cooperating during course of trial due to which bailable warrant has been issued. 8. In such situation, this Court does not find any good ground to grant indulgence in the matter. However, applicant is granted liberty to approach trial court for regular bail. 9. Anticipatory Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 7.5.2025 Satish Digitally signed by :- SATISH KUMAR BHARATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench