HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2323 of 2025 Court No. - 11 HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J. 1.Heard Shri learned counsel for the appellant, Shri Ajay Kumar Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and Shri Chandra Kishore, learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 and perused the record. 2. The present appeal under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been filed against the order dated 16.07.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Raebareli in Bail Application No.1937/2025, arising out of F.I.R./Case Crime No.0243 of 2024, under Sections- 191(3), 103(2), 352, 3 (5) of B.N.S. and Section 3 (2)(v) of SC/ST Act, at Police Station - Nasirabad, District - Raebareli, whereby the bail application of the appellant has been rejected. 3. While pressing the instant application for bail, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. 4. He further stated that co-accused namely Naveen Singh and Harshit Mishra have already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order(s) dated 02.07.2025 and 07.07.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No(s).1500 and 3753 of 2025, respectively. Copies of bail orders of co-accused are annexed as Annexure No.17 to the present appeal. 5. It is further stated that main witness of the fact i.e. informant has already been examined before the trial Court and in this view of the matter, possibility of influencing the witness of the fact would not arise and other Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Arpit Singh, Somdutta Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Chandra Kishore, Rajesh Kumar Shukla Arjun Yadav .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Respondent(s) witnesses in fact are formal witnesses and as per the charge-sheet, the prosecution would examine twenty-seven witnesses, and therefore, the possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is extremely bleak. 6. Shri Ajay Kumar Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and Shri Chandra Kishore, learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant, however, they could not dispute the above contentions made by the appellant's counsel including that co-accused have already been released on bail by this Court. 7. Upon due consideration of arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and going through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R., as well as other relevant documents and the facts & circumstances of the case including the role attributed to the appellant as also that co-accused have already been released on bail by this Court as also that witness of the fact has already been examined 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. 8. Order dated 16.07.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Raebareli in Bail Application No.1937/2025, arising out of F.I.R./Case Crime No.0243 of 2024, under Sections- 191(3), 103(2), 352, 3 (5) of B.N.S. and Section 3 (2)(v) of SC/ST Act, at Police Station - Nasirabad, District - Raebareli is hereby set aside. 9. Let the appellant - Arjun Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a 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 CRLA No. 2323 of 2025 2 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. 10. 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. 11. 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. September 18, 2025 Mohit Singh/- CRLA No. 2323 of 2025 3 (Saurabh Lavania,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHIT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench