HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3169 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J. 1. Rejoinder affidavit filed in the Court today is taken on record. 2. Case called out. No one appeared on behalf of the private opposite party No. 2 despite service of notice, as appears from Annexure No. CA-1 to the counter affidavit of State and order of this Court dated 10.11.2025. Learned AGA is present in the Court. In these circumstances and also taking note of the order of this Court dated 10.11.2025, which says "It is made clear that on the next dates fixed in the case, the case would not be adjourned in the absence of the opposite party No.2 and the matter would be heard and decided on merits and appropriate orders would be passed in the case in first call", the Court proceeded to hear the instant bail appeal on merits. 3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA for the State of U.P. and perused the record. 4. By means of instant appeal under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989, the appellant has challenged the impugned order dated 22.08.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Raebareli in Bail Application No. 2009 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime No. 286 of 2025, under Sections 192(2), 109(1), 115(2), 352, 351(3) Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (in short "B.N.S.") and Sections 3(2)(v) S.C/S.T Act, P.S.- Milariya, District- Raibareli. 5. For the purposes of seeking bail, it is submitted that a perusal of FIR in issue would indicate that general role has been assigned to all the accused including the applicant, who is languishing in jail since 10.07.2025. 6. It is further stated that co-accused namely Siddharth Singh @ Chandan Singh, having similar role, has already been released on bail by the court concerned vide order dated 16.10.2025 passed in First Bail Application No. 2809 of 2025. 7. It is further stated that the trial would not conclude in near future as the same is not proceeding in the manner as is required under the law and also that before the trial court, the prosecution would examined 4 witnesses. 8. It is further stated that as the charge sheet has already been filed before the trial court therefore it would not be possible for the appellant to tamper the evidence of prosecution an also influence the witnesses of prosecution. 9. Thus, taking note of aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as also that the appellant is in jail since 10.07.2025, indulgence of this Court is required in the matter and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed. 10. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant, however, he Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Sanat Singh, Sudhir Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Chetan Singh @ Chotu Singh .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko. And Another .....Respondent(s) could not dispute the above contentions made by the appellant's counsel including that co-accused Siddharth Singh @ Chandan Singh, having similar role, has already been granted bail by the court concerned. 11. Considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A., and gone through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R., medical report as well as other relevant documents including co-accused Siddharth Singh @ Chandan Singh, having similar role, has already been granted bail by the court concerned. 12. Upon due consideration of above facts and circumstances including the statement(s) of the victim and contents of the FIR as also keeping in view the fact that the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, this Court is of the view that the appeal has substance and it is accordingly, allowed. 13. The impugned order dated 22.08.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Raebareli in Bail Application No. 2009 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime No. 286 of 2025, under Sections 192(2), 109(1), 115(2), 352, 351(3) Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (in short "B.N.S.") and Sections 3(2)(v) S.C/S.T Act, P.S.- Milariya, District- Raibareli, is hereby set aside. 14. Let appellant- Chetan Singh @ Chotu Singh be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on her furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions :- (i) The appellant will cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. (iii) The appellant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(es). (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 will 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. 15. As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observations 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 made in this order. November 13, 2025 Arun/- CRLA No. 3169 of 2025 2 (Saurabh Lavania,J.) Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR GANGWAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench