Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:53928 Court No. - 80 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1026 of 2025 Appellant :- Mohammad Rafique Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Mohammad Mustafa Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and perused the material available on record. 3. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (hereinafter referred to as SC/ST Act) has been preferred by the appellant Mohammad Rafique Ali with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 28.11.2024 passed by the leaned Additional District and Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Siddharthnagar and to release him on bail. 4. The F.I.R. of this case was lodged by the informant Amarnath under Sections 303 (2), 62, 115 (2), 352, 351 (3), 110 B.N.S. and & Section 3(1)(da), 3(1)(dha), 3(2)(va) SC/ST Act against the named accused persons Harshit, Aditya, Ankit Shukla and one unknown accused. It is alleged in the F.I.R. that all the named accused persons inflicted serious and grievous injuries to the injured Ravindra @ Shivam and he was taken to the hospital. F.I.R. was lodged and now after completing the investigation, charge sheet has been submitted under Sections 303 (2), 62, 115 (2), 352, 351 (3), 110, 317(4) of B.N.S. and & Section 3(1)(da), 3(1)(dha), 3(2)(va) SC/ST Act. 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent, he has not committed the alleged offence but he has been falsely implicated in this case. Alleged offences are not attracted against him. Essential ingredients to establish an offence under SC/ST Act are also missing in this case. 6. It is further submitted that in his statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. the informant Amarnath has not supported the prosecution case so far as the name of accused persons participating in the commission of the crime is concerned. It is next submitted that the present accused appellant is not named in the F.I.R. and he has not assigned any specific role of assault in the commission of the crime. It is further submitted that the injuries sustained by the injured are simple in nature. The trial Court 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 also submitted that the appellant is in jail since 12.11.2024 having no criminal history. 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. 7. Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer but however, the Court took notice of the fact that learned counsel appearing for the informant made a statement at bar that the present accused appellant has falsely been implicated in this matter. 8. 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. 9. 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 appellant has made out a case for bail. The 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. 10. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is, hereby, set-aside. 11. Let the appellant- Mohammad Rafique involved in Case Crime No. 162 of 2024 under Sections 303 (2), 62, 115 (2), 352, 351 (3), 110, 317 (4) B.N.S. and & Section 3(1)(da), 3(1)(dha), 3(2)(va) SC/ST Act, Police Station - Dhebarua, District- Siddharthnagar be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy 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 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 prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 11.4.2025 Rmk. Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad