HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3223 of 2025 Court No. - 21 HON'BLE MANJIVE SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard Shri Pravin Singh, learned counsel for the appellants and learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State. 2. In spite of notice of this criminal appeal having been served on Opposite Parties No. 2, 3 & 4, none is present on their behalf. 3. The captioned criminal appeal has been filed challenging therein, the judgment and order dated 11.09.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Raebareli in Bail Application No. 2621 of 2025, Nitesh Vishwakarma & Another Vs. State of U.P. & Another; arising out of Case Crime No. 270 of 2025 registered under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3), 110, 117(2) B.N.S., 2023 and Section 3(1)(r) & (s) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 in Police Station - Bhadokhar, District - Raebareli whereby, the bail application of the appellants had been rejected. 4. It has been contended on behalf of the appellants that from the contents of the F.I.R. and statement of the informant recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S., 2023, it is apparent that general role of assault had been assigned to all the three accused i.e. Nitesh, Nitin and Brindavan. It has further been contended that neither any specific weapon has been assigned in the hands of the appellants nor there is any allegation that the injury sustained by the victim is due to assault given by a particular appellant. Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Pravin Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Rakesh Pratap Singh Nitesh Vishwakarma And Another .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) 5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants has submitted that the appellants are in judicial custody since 25.08.2025. It has further been submitted that it is a matter of cross-case between the parties and the appellants had lodged the F.I.R. in respect of the incident in question and in that matter investigation is continuing and charge sheet has yet not been filed. 6. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State has opposed prayer of the appellant for grant of bail. 7. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsels appearing for the parties and prima facie, I find that general role has been assigned to all the accused. I further find that neither any specific weapon has been assigned in the hands of the appellants nor any specific injury had been attributed to them. 8. This Court also finds that it is a matter of cross-case lodged by the parties against each other and in the F.I.R. lodged by the appellants, there is allegation that the appellants also suffered injury during the scuffle between the parties. This Court further finds that the appellants are in judicial custody since 25.08.2025. 9. Having considered the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that the appellants are entitled to be enlarged on bail during trial. 10. In view of the aforesaid reasons, this criminal appeal is allowed. 11. Consequently, the bail application bearing number 01 of 2025 filed along with this appeal also stands allowed and the order dated 11.09.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Raebareli in Bail Application No. 2621 of 2025 is set aside. 12. The trial court / competent court is hereby directed to enlarge the appellants, Nitesh Vishwakarma & Brindavan Vishwakarma on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- CRLA No. 3223 of 2025 2 (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(es). (iv) The appellants shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. (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. (vi) The appellants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel and cooperate in the early disposal of the trial without seeking unnecessary adjournment. (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.P.C.. 13. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 14. The observations made hereinabove by this Court are only for the purpose of disposal of this appeal-application for bail and shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. December 5, 2025 Lokesh Kumar CRLA No. 3223 of 2025 3 (Manjive Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- LOKESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench