HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 257 of 2024 Court No. - 28 HON'BLE PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J. Vide order dated 30.01.2024, the appellant was granted interim bail as well as notice was issued to opposite parties and as per office report, the notice has been served on opposite parties. Today when the case is taken up, neither counsel on behalf of opposite parties is present nor any counter has been filed, therefore, this Court has no option but to proceed in the matter to decide the instant appeal. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned AGA for the State as well as perused the record. 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 18.08.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Barabanki in Bail Application No. 2632 of 2025, in Case Crime No. 252 of 2025, under Sections 3(5), 352, 118(1), 115(2), 351(3), 109(1) of BNS and Sections 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha), 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Jaidpur, District Barabanki, whereby the bail application of the appellant has been rejected. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Dilip Kumar Pandey, Manoj Kumar Verma Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Deepak Jaiswal @ Sonu .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) the victim was major at the time of incident. He next submits that the victim herself left the parental house and she is a consenting party. He next added that the appellant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 10.06.2023 and in case the appellant is enlarged on regular bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and he shall also fully cooperate with the trial. He has further submitted that there is no possibility of the appellant 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 appellant submits that the instant criminal appeal deserves to be allowed and the impugned order may be set aside and consequently, the appellant deserves to be enlarged on regular bail. Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the prayer by submitting that the appellant is named in the FIR and he was involved in committing the offence, therefore he is not entitled to be enlarged on regular 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 appellant. 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 is apparent that appellant has already been granted interim bail by this Court vide order dated 30.01.2024; the victim was major at the time of incident and she herself left the parental house and appears to be a consenting party, the appellant has no criminal history, therefore, the interim bail order 30.01.2024 is hereby confirmed and the order passed by the court below is set aside. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. Consequently, the impugned order dated 18.08.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Barabanki in Bail Application No. 2632 of 2025, in Case Crime No. 252 of 2025, under Sections 3(5), 352, 118(1), 115(2), 351(3), 109(1) of BNS and Sections 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha), 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Jaidpur, District Barabanki, is hereby set aside. CRLA No. 257 of 2024 2 Let the appellant-Deepak Jaiswal @ Sonu be released on regular bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties relating to his family members 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.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 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 31, 2025 kkv/ CRLA No. 257 of 2024 3 (Pramod Kumar Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench