Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:8289 Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4041 of 2024 Appellant :- Ajeej Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Sushil Kumar Misra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Anil Kumar Awasthi,Vishnu Kant Dwivedi 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 6.11.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act, Lucknow. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for respondent as well as the learned AGA and perused the entire record. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Victim was major and consensus. There was relations between the parties and they were living together. On account of dispute between both of them, present F.I.R. was lodged and now they are living with each other. Offence cannot be said to be made out against the appellant. Even in the statement of the victim recorded before the learned Magistrate, she was consensus. 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. Appellant is in jail since 10.11.2024. 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. On the other hand, learned counsel for opposite party as well as AGA opposed the prayer for bail. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties 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, 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 Ajeej involved in Case Crime No. 368 of 2024, under Sections 89, 69, 351(2) B.N.S.,2023 and Section 3(2)(V) , 3(1)(da) SC/ST Act, P.S. Malihabad, District Lucknow 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 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 :- 10.2.2025 Anurag Singh Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench