HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 7188 of 2025 Court No. - 87 HON'BLE ANIL KUMAR-X, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for appellant and learned AGA for the State. 2. Learned AGA states that notice has been served on opposite party no. 2, however, none has appeared on behalf of opposite party no.2 to oppose the appeal. 3. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of The Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been preferred by the appellant with a prayer to allow the appeal, set aside the bail rejection order dated 30.7.2025 passed in Bail Application No. 1300/2025 (Umesh @ Babni Vs. Government of U.P), and to release the appellant on bail in Case Crime No.82/2025, u/s - 62, 64(1), 76, 352, 351(3) B.N.S (Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita) and 3(2)V and 3(1)Da 3(1)Dha S.C, S.T Act, Police Station-Vindhamganj, District-Sonbhadra. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that an FIR in this case was lodged after a delay of five months. Alleged incident occurred on 24.1.2025 and an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was moved by the informant on 5.3.2025. Subsequently, FIR was lodged on 17.5.2025 and an allegation of rape has been made against the appellant. However, when the matter was inquired by the police at the time when a direction by the Magistrate concerned was given on the filing of application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., a report was submitted that certain dispute between the parties pertaining to money transaction was in existence. It was further submitted that the said dispute has led the victim to lodge this Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Hirdesh Kumar Yadav, Sushma Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Umesh @ Babni .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) FIR. The appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It was also submitted that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court. In such circumstances, the appellant is entitled to bail. 5. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer. 6. I have considered the rival submissions so made and have gone through the entire record. 7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail. 8. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside. Pending application, if any, shall stand disposed of. 9. Let the appellant-Umesh @ Babni involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. (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 CRLA No. 7188 of 2025 2 officer or tamper with the evidence. 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall be at liberty to take appropriate coercive action for appearance of the accused or to cancel the bail granted. October 15, 2025 SK CRLA No. 7188 of 2025 3 (Anil Kumar-X,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUSHEEL KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad