Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:45910 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1167 of 2025 Appellant :- Salman @ Abbu Sen Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Satyendra Nath Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. 1. Counter affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. Case called out. 3. Considering the Office Report dated 14.05.2025 as also Annexure C.A.-1 of counter affidavit filed by the State with a proof of service of notice upon opposite party no.2, this Court finds that service of notice upon the opposite party no.2 is sufficient. However, no one appeared on behalf of opposite party no.2 to oppose the present appeal. In that view of the matter, this Court proceeds to hear the instant appeal. 4. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 5. 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 18.02.2025 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Sultanpur in Bail Application No.286 of 2025, arising out of FIR/Case Crime No.227 of 2024, under Sections- 363, 302, 201 I.P.C. and Section- 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Kadipur, District- Sultanpur. 6. It is stated that according to the case of prosecution, as indicated in the FIR lodged against unknown person, registered as FIR No.0227 at P.S. Kadipur, District Sultanpur on 01.06.2024 some unknown person enticed away the grand- daughter of the informant. The incident as per FIR is of 10:00 P.M. It is stated that the statement of the victim, upon recovery, was recorded in terms of Section 161 Cr.P.C., a copy of which is annexed as Annexure No.3, and from a bare perusal of the same, it would indicate that the appellant has not committed any offence for the reason that according to the statement of the victim, on 31.05.2024 as she was scolded by her father, she left her parental house and went to the house of her aunt (bua) where she stayed for ten days and thereafter came to her parental house. 7. It is further stated that the victim denied for medical examination. It is further stated that according to the case of prosecution, the custody of the victim was given to the informant and thereafter the victim again left the house of informant and on 03.09.2024 when the informant was searching the victim, one person informed him that the body of the victim is lying near canal situated at Village Vadaha, Gosaiganj. Thereafter various persons including the informant and father of the informant rushed to the spot and identified the body and after preparation of inquest report, post mortem was carried out. 8. It is further stated that after the last rites, supplementary statements (majeed bayan) were recorded by the Investigating Officer and based upon the same the appellant has been implicated for the offence under Section 302 and 201 I.P.C. 9. It is further stated that as per the initial story of the prosecution in the FIR, if could be proved before the trial court, then the offence under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C. would be attracted and the rest of the offences indicated under Sections 302 and 201 I.P.C. would not be attracted for the reason that it is a case of circumstantial evidence and there is no link to connect the appellant with this crime. 10. Further submission is that if the initial story of the prosecution is taken on its face value, then taking note of the same, particularly, the difference of religion, it would a case of honour killing and appellant has been implicated. 11. It is further submitted that co-accused Sarvar @ Atif, having identical role, has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 24.07.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No.637 of 2025 and the appellant, having no criminal history, is in jail since 30.09.2024, hence he prays that the present appeal is liable to be allowed and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appellant may be enlarged on bail. 12. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail, however, he could not dispute the aforesaid contentions of counsel for the appellant. 13. Considered the submissions advanced by the counsel for the appellant and , learned A.G.A. for the State as also learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and all the relevant documents placed on record. 14. Upon due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of counsel for the parties, F.I.R., impugned order, as also the fact that co-accused- Sarvar @ Atif, having identical role, has already been granted bail by this Court vide dated 24.07.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No.637 of 2025 and appellant, having no criminal history is in jail since 30.09.2024 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. 15. Order 18.02.2025 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Sultanpur in Bail Application No.286 of 2025, arising out of FIR/Case Crime No.227 of 2024, under Sections- 363, 302, 201 I.P.C. and Section- 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Kadipur, District- Sultanpur is hereby set aside. 16. Let the appellant- Salman @ Abbu Sen 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. 17. 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 18. 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 :- 6.8.2025 Anand/- Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench