HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5240 of 2025 Court No. - 87 HON'BLE ANIL KUMAR-X, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for appellant, Shri Mohammad Sadab Khan, learned counsel for the informant and learned AGA for the State. 2. 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 19.5.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Jalaun, and to release the appellant on bail in Case Crime No. 0064 of 2025, under Sections 108, 115 (2), 352, 35 (3) of The Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 at Police Station Madhogarh, District- Jalaun. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant and the deceased were acquainted and were in love with each other. Marriage of the deceased was fixed with one Deepak s/o Ram Prakash. Deceased committed suicide and informant lodged an FIR against the appellant alleging that his daughter has committed suicide because the appellant not only assaulted the brother of deceased with a knife, but was also threatening the family members of the informant. Allegation of the informant is that threatening and assault by the appellant has led the deceased to commit suicide. However, informant has stated in the FIR that when his son was assaulted by the appellant and caused incised wound by attacking him with a knife, an application was moved by him in Police Station. However, a compromise between the parties was recorded Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Ajay Sengar Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Mohammad Sadab Khan Vivek Alias Aditya .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) on 25.4.2025 at Police Station. In the said compromise, it has been mentioned that the appellant will not make any effort in future to solemnized his marriage with the deceased. There was no mention of any injury which the brother of the deceased has sustained as as result of the assault by the appellant. It was submitted by the learned counsel that all the circumstances read together lead to only conclusion that the deceased has committed suicide for some another reason and appellant has been falsely implicated in this case because he was trying to marry with the deceased which was refused by the informant. He has not committed the present offence. It was 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. 4. Learned A.G.A. and the learned counsel appearing for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and have submitted that not only the brother of the deceased was assaulted by the appellant by using a knife, but the appellant is still threatening the informant and his family members. The compromise was signed by the informant after being compelled by the police personnel who did it at the instance of the appellant. Therefore, the appellant is not entitled to bail. 5. I have considered the rival submissions so made and have gone through the entire record. 6. 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. 7. 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. 8. Let the appellant- Vivek Alias Aditya, 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. CRLA No. 5240 of 2025 2 (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 officer or tamper with the evidence. 9. 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. 5240 of 2025 3 (Anil Kumar-X,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUSHEEL KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad