HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 8055 of 2024 ALONGWITH CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 8353 of 2024 Court No. - 87 HON'BLE ANIL KUMAR-X, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for appellants and learned AGA for the State. None has appeared on behalf of the respondent/informant even in the revised call. 2. These criminal appeals under Section 14-A(2) of The Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 have been preferred by the appellant with a prayer to allow the appeals, set aside the bail rejection orders each dated 22.7.2024 passed in Bail Application No.1378 of 2024 (Golu Singh @ Shailendra Pratap Singh vs. State) and Bail Application No.1336 of 2024, and to release the appellants on bail in Case Crime No.188 of 2024, under Sections 304, 504 IPC, Section Section 3(1)Da, Dha, 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act and Section 7 of Criminal Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Ashish Kumar Mishra, Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Gyan Babu Pal, Krishna Kumar Chaurasia Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Ajit Pratap Kushwaha, Amar Bahadur Maurya, Yatharth Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Gyan Babu Pal, Krishna Kumar Chaurasia Golu Singh Alias Shailendra Pratap Singh .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) Nafisa Begum And Another .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) Law (Amendment) Act, Police Station - Kotwali Chunar, District - Mirzapur. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that informant in the first information report has stated that his wife died after a fall on the ground during scuffle which took place between the informant and appellants. It was further submitted no specific role has been assigned to any of the appellants. The appellants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. It was submitted that the impugned orders rejecting the bail applications of the appellants suffer from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court. The appellants are in jail since 9.6.2024. In such circumstances, the appellants are entitled to bail. 4. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer. 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 appellants have made out a case for bail. 6. Accordingly, the appeals are allowed and the impugned orders rejecting the bail applications of the appellants are set-aside. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of. 7. Let the appellants, namely Golu Singh @ Shailendra Pratap Singh, Nafisa Begum and Ramzam Ali, and 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 appellants will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The appellants will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The appellants will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. CRLA No. 8055 of 2024 2 (iv) The appellants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected. (v) The appellants 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. 8. 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 13, 2025 SK CRLA No. 8055 of 2024 3 (Anil Kumar-X,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUSHEEL KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad