HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2249 of 2025 Court No. - 28 HON'BLE PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned AGA for the State as well as perused the record. Learned counsel for the appellants has filed rejoinder affidavit, the same is taken on record. As per the office report dated 04.09.2025 notice has already been served upon the son of the opposite party No. 2 as the opposite party No.2 has expired. Today, when the case is taken up, no one appears on behalf of opposite party No.2. 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. 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 02.07.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Lakhimpur Kheri in Bail Application No. 806 of 2025 arising out of Complaint Case No. 967/2021, under Sections 323, 452, 427, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1) (x) SC/ST Act, Police Station Dhaurhara, District Lakhimpur Kheri, whereby the bail application of the appellants has been rejected. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants have falsely Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Abhishek Srivastava, Anurudh Kumar Singh, Ravindra Pandey, Vinay Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Sridhar And Another .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Respondent(s) been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the alleged incident is happened on 10.08.2004, while the complaint has been filed after three months on 19.11.2004. He further submits that no injury has been caused on any of the alleged injured and there is no medical report. He next submits that this case has been instituted on the basis of private complaint and all the witnesses are interested witnesses. He next submits that the appellants are languishing in jail since 11.06.2025 having no criminal history to their credit. He added that in case the appellants are enlarged on bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and they shall fully cooperate with the trial. He has further submitted that there is no possibility of the appellants to intimidate or pressurize the witnesses or any other persons acquainted with the facts of the present case. For the aforesaid reasons, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the instant criminal appeal deserves to be allowed and the impugned order may be set aside and consequently, the appellants deserve to be enlarged on bail. Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the prayer by submitting that there is active participation of accused/appellant in the crime. Therefore, the accused/ appellants are not entitled to be enlarged on bail and the instant criminal appeal deserves to be dismissed. However, he has been unable to dispute the other factual submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the accused/appellants. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of material available on record, including the allegations made in the FIR, it transpires that the alleged incident is happened on 10.08.2004, while the complaint has been filed after three months on 19.11.2004; no injury has been caused on any of the alleged injured and there is no medical report and the appellants are languishing in jail since 11.06.2025 and they have undertaken that in case they are enlarged on bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate with the trial. Without expressing any opinion on merit, this Court is of the view that the learned court below has failed to appreciate the material available on record, thus, the order passed by the court below is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. Consequently, the impugned order CRLA No. 2249 of 2025 2 dated 02.07.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Lakhimpur Kheri in Bail Application No. 806 of 2025 arising out of Complaint Case No. 967/2021, under Sections 323, 452, 427, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1) (x) SC/ST Act, Police Station Dhaurhara, District Lakhimpur Kheri, is hereby set aside. Let the appellants-Sridhar and Shivnarayan be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on their furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties relating to their family members to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to following additional conditions- (i) The appellants shall cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellants shall not tamper with the evidence during trial (iii) The appellants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(s). (iv) The appellants shall not commit an offence. (v) The appellants 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 appellants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. (vii) The appellants shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. (viii) The appellants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.PC. 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. As this order relates to enlargement of the appellants 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 30, 2025 Arvind CRLA No. 2249 of 2025 3 (Pramod Kumar Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- ARVIND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench