Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:6650 Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3467 of 2024 Appellant :- Mohd. Salman Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home, Lko And 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Seema Upadhyay Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Mukhtar Ahamad,Renu Devi Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. List revised none appeared for the respondent even in the revised call. Rejoinder-counter affidavit filed today by learned counsel for the appellant is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the respondent as well as the learned AGA and perused the entire record. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 27.09.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act, Barabanki, in Bail Application No. 3223 of 2024 (Mohd. Salman Vs. State of U.P.), arising out of case crime no. 1063 of 2023, under Sections 366, 376, 504, 506, 406 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(V) S.C. and S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 & Section 3/5(1) of U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, Police Station Dewa, District Barabanki. It is submitted that in this case the victim was major at the time of alleged incident and was in affair with the appellant and went with him voluntarily without any pressure from her house. She took clothes and jewellery from her house which shows that she was volunteer and was not taken away by force or under compulsion. It is also submitted that statement of victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded in relation to which she clearly stated that she was in affair with the appellant four years prior to the alleged incident in which she went away with him with jewellery from her house at 8 P.M. and then to Delhi where she lived with him for ten days and physical relations were also established on the pretext of marriage which also shows that she was consensous. The allegation regarding conversion of religion is totally false. Appellant is in jail since 26.07.2024 having no any criminal antecedent. All these facts were not taken into consideration by the learned trial court concerned while rejected the bail, therefore, request to release the appellant on bail during the pendency of appeal. Learned A.G.A. opposed the bail. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned A.G.A. and perusal of record, version in F.I.R., the statement of victim as recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., her age and she being consensuous and without making any further comment on the merit of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The learned trial court erred in rejecting the bail application. The impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set-aside and the appeal is to be allowed. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside. Let the appellant Mohd. Salman involved in Case Crime No. 1063 of 2023, under Sections 366, 376, 504, 506, 406 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(V) S.C. and S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 & Section 3/5(1) of U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, Police Station Dewa, District Barabanki be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. 1. The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. 2. The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. 3. The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. 4. The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which she is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which she is suspected. 5. 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 her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 30.1.2025 Suraj Srivastav Digitally signed by :- SURAJ SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench