HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 6018 of 2025 Court No. - 87 HON'BLE ANIL KUMAR-X, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for appellant and the learned AGA for State. 2. As per report of AGA, notice has been served on opposite party no. 2, however, none has appeared on behalf of opposite party no.2 to oppose the appeal. 3. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of The Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to allow the appeal, set aside the second bail rejection order dated 16.06.2025 passed by Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Kushinagar at Padrauna in Bail Application No. 1388/2025 (Ajmer Ansari Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another), arising out of Case Crime No.113/2025, under Sections 137(2), 87 B.N.S. and under Section 3(2) (V) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, at Police Station Nebua Naurangiya, District Kushi Nagar as well as First Bail Rejection Order dated 01.05.2025 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Kushinagar at Padrauna in First Bail Application No. 1017 of 2025 (Ajmer Ansari Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh), arising out of Case Crime No.113/2025, under Sections 137(2) and 87 B.N.S., Police Station Nebua Naurangiya, District Kushi Nagar. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that informant stated in the FIR that his minor daughter aged about seventeen years was enticed away by accused Neeraj Gupta with the assistance of appellant. When statement of victim was recorded under Section 180 and 183 of BNNS-2023, it was stated by the victim that she was having intimacy with the present appellant who called her at the house of his sister. She has further stated that Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Bishram Tiwari Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Ajmer Ansari .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) when she along with appellant was going towards the sister of appellant's house, she was apprehended by police personnel. Even victim has refused to undergo medical examination. Appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, appellant is entitled for bail. 5. Learned AGA for State has opposed the aforesaid prayer of the learned counsel for appellant and has submitted that victim had left her house after being called by present appellant. Her statement also reflects that she had left her house along with appellant without consent of her guardian. Hence, the appellant is not entitled for bail. 6. I have considered the rival submissions so made and have gone through the entire record. 7. After perusing the statement of victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of BNNS-2023, this Court finds that it is a fit case to grant bail to the appellant. 8. 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, the Court is of the opinion that the appellants have made out a case for bail. 9. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside. 10. Let the appellant- Ajmer Ansari involved in Case Crime No.113/2025, under Sections 137(2), 87 B.N.S. and under Section 3(2) (V) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, at Police Station Nebua Naurangiya, District Kushi Nagar, 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. (i) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. (iv) 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 CRLA No. 6018 of 2025 2 suspected. (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 or tamper with the evidence. 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the concerned Court shall be at liberty to take appropriate coercive action for appearance of the accused or to cancel the bail granted. October 27, 2025 Mukesh CRLA No. 6018 of 2025 3 (Anil Kumar-X,J.) Digitally signed by :- MUKESH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad