Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:8909 Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3906 of 2024 Appellant :- Nankoo Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home, Lko And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Ravindra Kumar Singh,Vivek Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Akhilesh Singh Chauhan,Satyendra Kumar Tiwari Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. 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 17.11.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act, District Shrawasti. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, as well as the learned AGA and perused the entire record. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that in this case the appellant was named in the F.I.R but during course of investigation he was exonerated. No any material was found against him. During course of trial, the appellant was summoned by the learned trial court while exercising the power under section 319 Cr.P.C and N.B.W was issued in pursuance to which he was sent to jail. He is in jail since 7.11.2024 having no any criminal antecedent except one case in which he is on bail, therefore, request to release on bail during course of trial. The Court below while passing the impugned order did not take into account the facts and evidence available on record in right perspective and erred in passing the same. It is lastly submitted that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court. Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that in this case the appellant also participated in marpeet with complainant's side in which the grievous injuries were sustained by the injured person, therefore, he is not entitled for bail. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned A.G.A and have gone through the entire record including the impugned order carefully. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment and injury report, this Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The Court below 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- Nankoo involved in Case Crime No. 301 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 427, 308, 324, 325, 326 IPC and Sections 3(1)(Da),3(1)(Dha) SC/ST Act, P.S. Sirsia, District Shrawasti 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 pressurise/ 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 he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he 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 him 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 :- 11.2.2025.GS Digitally signed by :- GHAN SHYAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench