HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 8302 of 2024 Court No. - 87 HON'BLE ANIL KUMAR-X, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for appellant and learned AGA for the State. No one appeared on behalf of the respondent/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 3.4.2024 passed in Bail Application No.480 of 2024, and to release the appellant on bail in Case Crime No.153 of 2024, under Sections 417, 420, 376D IPC and Section 3 (2) (V) SC /ST Act and Section 3/5(1) of U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, Police Station - Kannauj, District - Kannauj. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Victim, after making a false allegation against the appellant, has lodged an FIR after a delay of five months. Her statement that appellant presented himself as a hindu before her is not reliable because she herself has mentioned that appellant belonged to her maternal village. She has also alleged that appellant committed rape upon her on the false promise of marriage. Allegation in the FIR suggests that victim and appellant were consenting parties and when their relation turn sour, the FIR against the present appellant was lodged. It was submitted that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Sudhir Kumar Singh Parmar, Virendra Singh Parmar Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Sanjeev Kumar Mishra Mohammad Nazamuddin .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) warranting interference by this Court. The appellant is languishing in jail since 5.3.2024. In such circumstances, the appellant is entitled to bail. 4. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted the victim has supported the prosecution version. 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- Mohammad Nazamuddin, 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 officer or tamper with the evidence. 9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned CRLA No. 8302 of 2024 2 shall be at liberty to take appropriate coercive action for appearance of the accused or to cancel the bail granted. October 13, 2025 SK CRLA No. 8302 of 2024 3 (Anil Kumar-X,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUSHEEL KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad