HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2901 of 2025 Court No. - 28 HON'BLE PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant/applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. Learned A.G.A. has filed counter affidavit today in Court. The same is taken on record. 3. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred against the impugned order dated 31.07.2025 passed by Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act, Lakhimpur Kheri in Bail Application No. 300/2025: Ram Kumar Vs. State of U.P., arising out of Case Crime No. 916/2008 and S.T. No. 690/2009, under Sections 376, 392, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3(1) 12 S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Pasgwan, District Lakhimpur Kheri, whereby the bail application of the appellants has been rejected. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant was on bail in the aforesaid case and the trial of the case is going on. He further submits that the appellant after getting bail, the appellant remained present on the several dates before the trial court. Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Sarvesh Kumar Verma Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Ram Kumar .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) 5. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the appellant went to Hariyana to work as labour and he could not come back due to some unavoidable circumstances and the learned trial court passed the non-bailable warrant dated 07.02.2023 and after some time had issued notices to the sureties then he came to know about the non-bailable warrant against him. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant/applicant submits that after getting knowledge of the said order, the appellant came back to his village and he was ready to surrender before the court concern but the police had arrested him and sent him to jail on 13.07.2025 and since then he is in jail. Hence, he seeks bail and his bail application may be considered by this Court sympathetically. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant/applicant undertakes that in case the appellant/applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and remain present before the trial court in future and will not seek unnecessary adjournments without any cogent reason. 8. The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. 9. Having considered the submissions as advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant and learned AGA and perused the record as well as keeping in view the fact that the appellant/applicant was on bail granted by the trial court; due to non appearance of the appellant non-bailable warrants were issued against him and in pursuance of the same he has been arrested and was sent to jail; learned counsel for the appellant/applicant has assured the court that in case the appellant/applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and remain present before the trial court in future and will not seek unnecessary adjournments without any cogent reason; without expressing any opinion on merit, this Court of the view that the learned court below has failed to appreciate the material available on record. The order passed CRLA No. 2901 of 2025 2 by the court below is liable to be set aside and I find sufficient ground to release the appellant/applicant-Ram Kumar on bail. 10. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. Consequently, the impugned order dated 31.07.2025 passed by Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act, Lakhimpur Kheri in Bail Application No. 300/2025: Ram Kumar Vs. State of U.P., arising out of Case Crime No. 916/2008 and S.T. No. 690/2009, under Sections 376, 392, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3(1) 12 S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Pasgwan, District Lakhimpur Kheri is hereby set aside. 11. Let the appellant/applicant- Ram Kumar, be released on bail in S.T. No. 690/2009, under Sections 376, 392, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3(1) 12 S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Pasgwan, District Lakhimpur Kheri on furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to following additional conditions- (1) The appellant shall cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial (iii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(s). (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence. (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 them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (vi) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. CRLA No. 2901 of 2025 3 (vii) The appellant shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. (viii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.PC. 12. In case of default of above conditions, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law 13. As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observation(s) made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation(s) made in this order. October 29, 2025 Arvind CRLA No. 2901 of 2025 4 (Pramod Kumar Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- ARVIND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- ARVIND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench