HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3044 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. As per the report of the C.J.M. Lakhimpur Kheri dated 28.10.2025 notice has been served upon the opposite party No. 2, but till date neither any counsel has appeared on her behalf nor counter affidavit has been filed, it appears that she is not interested to file any counter affidavit. 4. In the above circumstances, as the matter pertains to bail this Court has no option but to proceed for final arguments to decide the present appeal. 5. 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 03.09.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act) Lakhimpur Kheri in Bail Application No. 349/2025: Shatrohan Vs. State of U.P., arising out of Case Crime No. 323/2008, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1) (10) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Bhira, District Lakhipur Kheri, whereby the bail application of the appellant has been rejected. 6. 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. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the appellant Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Uma Kant Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Shatrohan Lal .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko And Another .....Respondent(s) went to Delhi for labour work, where he fell ill and due to this, he could not return on time. Therefore, he could not appear before the court on scheduled dates nor could he inform his counsel about his inability to attend. Consequently, the appellant could not appear before the trial court, resulting in cancellation of his bail and declaration as absconder. Hence, he seeks bail and his bail application may be considered by this Court sympathetically. 8. 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. 9. The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. 10. 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 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 by the court below is liable to be set aside and I find sufficient ground to release the appellant/applicant-Shatrohan Lal on bail. 11. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. Consequently, the impugned order dated 03.09.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act) Lakhimpur Kheri in Bail Application No. 349/2025:Shatrohan Vs. State of U.P., arising out of Case Crime No. 323/2008, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1) (10) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Bhira, District Lakhipur Kheri is hereby set aside. 12. Let the appellant/applicant- Shatrohan Lal be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, CRLA No. 3044 of 2025 2 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. (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. 13. 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 14. 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. 3044 of 2025 3 (Pramod Kumar Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- ARVIND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench