Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:47808 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1932 of 2025 Appellant :- Zeeshan Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Girish Kumar Pande,Prashant Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. 1. From Annexure No. CA-1 to the counter affidavit of the State, it is apparent that service of notice upon private opposite party No. 2 is sufficient. However, today when the case called out, no one appeared on behalf of private opposite party No. 2 to oppose the present appeal. 2. In the aforesaid background of the case, the Court proceeded to hear the appeal on merits. 3. Heard counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 4. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 against the impugned order dated 01.05.2025 passed by learned Additional Session Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lakhimpur Kheri, in Bail Application No. 155 of 2025, arising out of F.I.R/ Case Crime No. 106 of 2025 under Sections 69, 352 BNS and Section 3(2)V of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Haiderabad, District-Lakhimpur Kheri. 5. While pressing the present appeal counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant, who is in jail since 10.04.2025 and has no criminal history, has been falsely implicated in the instant case and the entire story of the prosecution against the appellant indicated by the victim and that the appellant established physical relations with the victim on the pretext of marriage is false and concocted. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant also stated that if the case of the prosecution is taken on its face value, then in that event, the case of the appellant is squarely covered by the judgment(s) of Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in the case of Deepak Gulati vs. State of Haryana (2013) 7 SCC 675; Sonu @ Subhash Kumar vs. State of U.P. and Another (2021) 7 SCC; and Mandar Deepak Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra and Another 2022 SCC OnLine SC 2110. 7. He further submitted that the chances of conviction of the appellant in the instant case are extremely bleak in view of the law related to establishing relationship on the pretext of false promise of marriage. 8. He lastly submitted that all the aforesaid aspects of the case were not considered by the trial court, as such, the present appeal is liable to be allowed and the impugned order may be set aside and the appellant be enlarged on bail. 9. Learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail, however, he could not dispute the aforesaid contention of counsel for the appellant. 10. Considered the submissions advanced by the counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and all the relevant documents placed on record. 11. Upon due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A., F.I.R., impugned order, as also the observations made by Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgments, referred above, including that the appellant is in jail since 10.04.2025 and has no criminal history as also the submissions regarding physical relations as also the 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. 12. The impugned order dated 01.05.2025 passed by learned Additional Session Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lakhimpur Kheri, in Bail Application No. 155 of 2025, arising out of F.I.R/ Case Crime No. 106 of 2025 under Sections 69, 352 BNS and Section 3(2)V of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Haiderabad, District-Lakhimpur Kheri, is hereby set aside. 13. Let appellant-Zeeshan 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. 14. 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 15. 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 :- 14.8.2025 Vinay/- Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench