HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2783 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J. 1. Case called out. No one appeared on behalf of the private opposite party(s) despite service of notice, as appears from the Office Report dated 06.10.2025 and order of this Court dated 14.11.2025. Learned AGA is present in the Court. In these circumstances and also taking note of the order of this Court dated 14.11.2025, which says "It is made clear that on the next date of listing, the case would not be adjourned of any ground including illness slip and appropriate order would be passed in the first call", the Court proceeded to hear the instant bail appeal on merits. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA for the State of U.P. and perused the 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 12.08.2025 passed by Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act, Sitapur in Bail Application No. 247/2025, arising out of Case Crime No.255/2025, under Sections 115(2), 352, 74, 124(2) B.N.S., akin to Sections 323, 504, 354, 326B I.P.C., and Section 3(1)w(i), 3(2)(V), 3(2)(V)a SC/ST Act, Police Station- Sidhauli, District- Sitapur whereby the bail application of the appellant has been rejected. 4. While pressing the present appeal, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is languishing in jail since Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Arun Sinha, Ram Chandra Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Deva Mishra @ Devanand Mishra .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) 29.07.2025 in connection with the FIR in issue, though he has not committed any crime and he has falsely been implicated in the instant case. 5. It is also stated that the maximum punishment of seven years for the offence as indicated in the F.I.R. could be awarded. 6. It is further stated that there is no allegation in the F.I.R. which could attract Sections 354 I.P.C. and from bare reading of the F.I.R. it is also apparent that offences under the SC/ST Act is not made out. 7. The Investigating Officer (in short "I.O.") upon completion of investigation added Sections indicated under the SC/ST Act i.e. Sections 3(1)w(i), 3 (2)(v)a of SC/ST Act based upon the statement of victim. 8. It is further submitted that the allegation made in the F.I.R. to the effect that the appellant forcefully put the 'fevikwik' in the eye of victim is not correct. In fact, the appellant was pasting posters with the adhesive available with him and in altercation between the parties, accidently, the said adhesive which was in the hand of the appellant caused injury to the victim in her eye. 9. 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. 10. Learned A.G.A. for the State for the side opposite vehemently opposed the prayer for bail, however, he could not dispute the aforesaid contentions of counsel for the appellant. 11. Considered the submissions advanced by the counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and all the relevant documents placed on record. 12. Upon due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A., F.I.R., impugned order and also that the appellant is in jail since 29.07.2025 and chances of conviction of the appellant in the instant case as also the maximum punishment which could be awarded, this Court finds that the present appeal is liable to be allowed. Accordingly, it is allowed. CRLA No. 2783 of 2025 2 13. Order dated 12.08.2025 passed by Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act, Sitapur in Bail Application No. 247/2025, arising out of Case Crime No.255/2025, under Sections 115(2), 352, 74, 124(2) B.N.S., akin to Sections 323, 504, 354, 326B I.P.C., and Section 3(1)w(i), 3(2)(V), 3(2)(V)a SC/ST Act, Police Station- Sidhauli, District- Sitapur is hereby set aside. 14. Let the appellant- Deva Mishra @ Devanand Mishra 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. 15. 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. 16. As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observation(s) made in this order shall have CRLA No. 2783 of 2025 3 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 25, 2025 Arti/- CRLA No. 2783 of 2025 4 (Saurabh Lavania,J.) Digitally signed by :- ARTI MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench