Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:780 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2844 of 2024 Appellant :- Manish Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Gargi Prakash Misra,Sunita Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present appeal has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 06.04.2024 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act)/Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Unnao in Bail Application No.4095 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No.166 of 2023, under Sections 302, 323, 504, 201, 120-B I.P.C. and Section 3(2)V of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Bihar, District- Unnao. 3. It is evident from the record that notice has already been served upon private respondent, however, none appears on his behalf. Therefore, the matter is being proceeded for final disposal with the assistance of learned counsel for appellant as well as the learned A.G.A. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant was falsely implicated in the present case and he is in jail since 10.08.2023. As per the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 09/10.08.2023 at about 11 pm when the entire family was sleeping, appellant entered the house of the complainant and started beating the daughter of the complainant of the present case. In the said incident complainant herself, her husband Sajjan and Goldi have also received injuries. He further submits that no medico legal report of the complainant, her husband Sajjan and Goldi is available in the case-diary. The Investigating OfÏcer without going through the material on record in most mechanical manner submitted the charge-sheet. There is a major contradiction in the prosecution story and all these facts were not considered by the court below and rejected the bail application of the appellant. The appellant has no criminal history, therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and appellant may be enlarged on bail. 5. Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer of appellant but he does not dispute this fact that no medico legal report of the complainant, her husband Sajjan and Goldi, who are alleged to have received injuries in the incident, is available in the case-diary. 6. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of the appeal including the first information report, inquest as also the post-mortem report of the deceased as well as the statement of the witnesses; as it is evident that as per the prosecution case in the incident in question four persons have received injuries including the complainant, her husband Sajjan, Goldi and her daughter Soni, who later on died, but no medico legal report of complainant, her husband Sajjan and Goldi is available in the case-diary and without examining the entire material and the contradiction in the prosecution story, the court below has rejected the bail application of the appellant, therefore, in such circumstances, this Court is of the view that the aforesaid impugned order is liable to be set aside and appellant is entitled to be released on bail. 7. Resultantly, in the above facts and circumstances of the case, the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, hence, the present appeal has substance, and it is accordingly allowed, and the impugned order dated 06.04.2024 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act)/Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Unnao is hereby set aside. 8. Let the appellant- Manish Yadav, involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:- (1) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through their counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229- A of the Indian Penal Code. (iii) In case, the appellant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) 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. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the appellant is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. Order Date :- 6.1.2025. Rks. Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench