Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:41971 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1476 of 2025 Appellant :- Rizwan Alias Munaunu Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Ana Fatma,Mohd. Salman,Mukhtar Ahamad Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. 1. Case called out. Office report dated 05.06.2025 indicates that notice is served upon opposite party No.2 personally. However, when the case is called out, no one appeared on behalf of the respondent No.2 to oppose the appeal. Learned AGA is present for the State. 2. Heard Ms Ana Fatma, learned counsel for the appellant, Shri Badrul Hasan, 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 09.04.2025, passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act/Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Unnao in Bail Application No.953/2025 (Rizwan @ Munaunu Vs. State of U.P.), arising out of Case Crime No.0111/2025, under Sections 64, 333, 351 (3) of B.N.S., 2023 and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, P.S. - Bangarmau, District - Unnao. 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. He further stated that the informant, a married lady, aged about 39 years, having two children, which is apparent from the statement of respondent No.2 recorded during investigation, has leveled allegations against the appellant of committing rape in her house, in the written report submitted before the Police Officer based upon which the F.I.R. i.e. F.I.R. No.0111/2025 was lodged on 10.03.2025 at Police Station Bangarmau, District Unnao under Sections 333, 64, 351(3) of B.N.S. and Section 3 (2) (v) of SC/ST Act. 5. It is also submitted that the allegations leveled by the respondent No.2 against the appellant are completely false and concocted. It is for the reason that the F.I.R. was lodged after the delay of about 19 days as also that the medical opinion does not support the story of the prosecution. In continuation it is next submitted that according to the respondent No.2 the offence was committed when two children were present in the premises, however, their statements have not been recorded by the investigating officer, which shows that the story of the prosecution is bogus, false and appellant has been implicated on account of village party-bandi. 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 including delay in lodging the FIR, medical opinion as also the fact that the statements of children have not been recorded and also 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 09.04.2025, passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act/Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Unnao in Bail Application No.953/2025 (Rizwan @ Munaunu Vs. State of U.P.), arising out of Case Crime No.0111/2025, under Sections 64, 333, 351 (3) of B.N.S., 2023 and Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, P.S. - Bangarmau, District - Unnao is hereby set aside. 10. Let the appellant - Rizwan alias Munaunu 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 :- 22.7.2025 ML/- Digitally signed by :- MUNNA LAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench