HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 9019 of 2024 Court No. - 87 HON'BLE ANIL KUMAR-X, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for appellant and the learned AGA for State. 2. As per office report, 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-Rajesh with the prayer to allow the appeal, set aside the bail rejection order dated 14.08.2024 passed by learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act, District Saharanpur, arising out of Case Crime No.82 of 2024, Under Section 302, 201, 392, 411, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(2)V & 3(1) da, dha SC/ST Act, at Police Station Gagalheri, District Saharanpur. 4. Learned counsel for appellant has submitted that dead body of the unknown person was recovered on 14.5.2024. Information of the said dead body lying in an open place was given by home guard Manoj Kumar. On the said information, inquest and postmortem of deceased was carried out. It was found that deceased has died due to strangulation. Thereafter, an FIR was lodged by concerned S.H.O. of Police Station Gagalhedi, District Saharanpur. After seventeen days, an application by mother of deceased was filed before Investigating Officer. Choti, mother of deceased, mentioned in her FIR that appellant visited at her house in intoxicated condition and started abusing. Appellant threatened that he will kill her because he has already killed her son. It was further submitted that on the basis of said statement alone, he was implicated in this case. No other evidence except the statement of mother of deceased has been collected by the Investigating Officer to indicate that involvement of appellant in this case. Even the Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Sumit Goyal Counsel for Respondent(s) : Akhilesh Kumar, G.A. Rajesh .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) statement of two witnesses who claimed to have seen the deceased along with accused was recorded by Investigating Officer after seventeen days. Hence, the appellant is entitled for bail. 5. Learned AGA has submitted that statement of witnesses who have seen the accused along with deceased before his death cannot be disbelieved at this stage merely because their statement was recorded after seventeen days. Therefore, appellant is not entitled for bail. 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, severity of punishment, the Court is of the opinion that the appellants have 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. 9. Let the appellant-Rajesh involved in Case Crime No.82 of 2024, Under Section 302, 201, 392, 411, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(2)V & 3(1) da, dha SC/ST Act, at Police Station Gagalheri, District Saharanpur, 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 officer or tamper with the evidence. 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the concerned Court shall be at liberty to take appropriate coercive action for appearance of the CRLA No. 9019 of 2024 2 accused or to cancel the bail granted. October 15, 2025 Mukesh CRLA No. 9019 of 2024 3 (Anil Kumar-X,J.) Digitally signed by :- MUKESH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad