HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4452 of 2025 Court No. - 87 HON'BLE ANIL KUMAR-X, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for appellant and learned AGA for the State. None has appeared on behalf of the informant even in the revised call. 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 21.4.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Bhadohi and to release the appellant on bail in Case Crime No.124 of 2024, Under Section-302, 120-B I.P.C., & Section 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act, Police Station- Gopiganj, District-Bhadohi. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that son of informant met with an accident in the year 2018 and subsequently he died due to injuries he sustained in that accident. Said accident occurred with the tractor of the appellant. A criminal case pertaining to the said accident was lodged against Babu Ram Gautam and Daya Ram Gautam. This FIR has been lodged by the informant alleging that her husband was threatened by accused Babu Ram Gautam and Daya Ram Gautam and they said that if he will not compromise in the earlier case pertaining to the accident, they will kill him. The name of the appellant was not mentioned by the informant in the FIR. However, when statement of informant was recorded by I.O., she also arrayed the present appellant by stating that appellant was also involved with the named accused persons. The appellant has been roped in this case only on the basis of suspicion. He has not committed the present offence. It was submitted that the Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Sanjay Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Suneel Kumar Mishra Gopalkrishna Tiwari .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) 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. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that son of the deceased has stated that accused Babu Ram Gautam, Daya Ram Gautam and the appellant-Gopalkrishna Tiwari have threatened the deceased on the day of occurrence and were saying that if he will not compromise in the earlier case, they will kill him. It was further submitted that evidence available on record is sufficient to show that the appellant alongwith other accused persons had a motive to kill the deceased. Moreover, the appellant with other accused was also seen with the deceased before his death by the son of deceased. Hence, 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- Gopalkrishna Tiwari, 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. CRLA No. 4452 of 2025 2 (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 17, 2025 SK CRLA No. 4452 of 2025 3 (Anil Kumar-X,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUSHEEL KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad