HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2355 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed in the Court today is taken on record. 2. Heard counsel for the parties. 3. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 against the impugned order dated 07.07.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Pratapgarh in Bail Application No. 2319 of 2025, arising out of FIR/Case Crime No. 177 of 2025, under Sections- 69, 89, 115(2), 352, 351(3) B.N.S. and Sections- 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha), 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Raniganj, District- Pratapgarh. 4. While pressing the present appeal, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the applicant solemnized marriage with the opposite party No. 2 on 07.11.2024 and thereafter on account of some dispute, the opposite party No. 2 left the company of the appellant and thereafter, being annoyed, lodged the FIR in issue, basis of pending criminal proceedings, making allegations, though not correct, in the FIR to the effect that the appellant established physical relations with her on the pretext of false promise of marriage and if the allegations levelled in the FIR are taken on its face value even then in that eventuality, the possibility of conviction of appellant is bleak in view of law settled by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgment(s) rendered in the case of Deepak Gulati vs. State of Haryana, (2013) 7 SCC 675; Sonu @ Subhash Kumar vs. State of U.P. and Another, (2021) 7 SCC; Mandar Deepak Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra and Another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 2110 and Amol Bhagwan Nehul vs. State of Maharashtra and another, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1230. 5. It is further submitted that appellant, having no criminal history, is languishing in jail since 17.06.2025. In these circumstances, the present appeal is liable to be allowed and the impugned order may be set aside and the appellant be enlarged on bail. 6. Learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 opposed the prayer for bail, however, they could not dispute the aforesaid contentions of counsel for the appellant. 7. Considered the submissions advanced by the counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 and all the relevant documents placed on record. 8. Upon due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Manish Kumar Gond Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Ravi Pandey, Suchita Tripathi Saurabh Maurya (Kushwaha) .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Respondent(s) counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A., F.I.R., impugned order, as also the observations made by Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgments, referred above, including that the appellant is in jail since 17.06.2025 and chances of conviction of the appellant in the instant case, this Court finds that the present appeal is liable to be allowed. Accordingly, it is allowed. 9. Order dated 07.07.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Pratapgarh in Bail Application No. 2319 of 2025, arising out of FIR/Case Crime No. 177 of 2025, under Sections- 69, 89, 115(2), 352, 351(3) B.N.S. and Sections- 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha), 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Raniganj, District- Pratapgarh is hereby set aside. 10. Let the appellant- Saurabh Maurya (Kushwaha) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions :- (i) 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 him 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.P.C. 11. 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 12. 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. November 6, 2025 Arun/- CRLA No. 2355 of 2025 2 (Saurabh Lavania,J.) Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR GANGWAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench