Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:25312 Court No. - 47 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 937 of 2025 Appellant :- Nandu Yadav Alias Narayan Yadav Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Piyush Kesharvani,Roshani Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Sushil Kumar,Swatantra Kumar Singh Hon'ble Siddharth,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant; Sri Swatantra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 and learned A.G.A for the State and perused the material placed on record. 2. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant to set aside the impugned order dated 02.12.2024 whereby the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Jaunpur has rejected the bail application of the appellant moved by him in Case Crime No. 237 of 2022, under Sections- 302, 34 IPC and Section- 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Kerakat, District- Jaunpur. 3. This is third criminal appeal of the appellant. 4. Earlier appeals were rejected by other coordinate Benches of this court which are not available now. 5. Counsel for the appellant submits that although he has been assigned the main role in the alleged offence along with other co-accused but before the trial court, three prosecution witnesses of fact have been examined who have not supported the prosecution case and have been declared hostile. The appellant has no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 05.07.2022. It is a case of malicious prosecution under the provisions of SC/ST Act. In case, the appellant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. Co- accused, Nisha Yadav, has granted bail by this court vide Criminal Appeal No. 8155 of 2022. 6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has supported the order passed by the Sessions court and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant and submits that the allegations involved are very serious in nature. But he could not point out any material to the contrary. He further submits that in case the appellant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail. 7. It appears from the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and from perusal of material on record that the Court below has not properly considered the facts of the case. Hence, in view of above consideration, the order of rejection of bail passed by the court below dated 02.12.2024 is, hereby, set aside. 8. Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; appellant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, court is of the opinion that the appellant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 9. Let appellant, Nandu Yadav Alias Narayan Yadav, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions: (i) 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. (ii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. (iv) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial court. (v) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. (vi) The appellant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. If in the opinion of the trial court that 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 in accordance with law. 11. The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously in accordance with law within period of one year after the release of the appellant, if there is no other legal impediment. 12. It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order. 13. The criminal appeal is allowed. 14. Registrar (compliance) is directed to communicate this order to the trial Court for necessary compliance within ten days. Order Date :- 20.2.2025 Rohit Digitally signed by :- ROHIT DAS High Court of Judicature at Allahabad