HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2377 of 2025 Court No. - 28 HON'BLE PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J. Vide order dated 05.08.2025, the notice has been issued to opposite party no. 2 and as per the avermments made in para 3 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State alongwith the service report dated 19.08.2025, the service of notice upon opposite party no. 2/victim is found to be sufficient. Today when the case is taken up, neither counsel on behalf of opposite party no. 2 is present nor any counter has been filed, therefore, this Court has no option but to proceed in the matter to decide the instant appeal. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned AGA for the State and perused the record. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred against the impugned order dated 20.05.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Pratapgarh in Bail No. 1481 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 58 of 2022, under Sections 147/148/323/325/304/452/504/506 IPC, Police Station Kandhai, District Pratapgarh, whereby the bail application of the appellant has been rejected. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has falsely been implicated in the present case. Eight persons have been named in the First Information Report, including the present Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Kaushal Kishore Tewari, Shakti Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Ram Khelawan .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another .....Respondent(s) appellant. No specific role has been assigned to the present appellant. Five accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court. Two co-accused persons, namely, Paras Saroj and Samkalli @ Shyamkalli, having similar role to that of present appellant, have also been enlarged on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 18th of September, 2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 2313 of 2025, as such, the present appellant is also entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity. He further submits that the appellant is languishing in jail since 25.04.2025 having no criminal history to his credit and he undertakes that case the appellant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and he shall fully cooperate with the trial. He has further submitted that there is no possibility of the appellant to intimidate or pressurize the witnesses or any other persons acquainted with the facts of the present case. For the aforesaid reasons, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the instant criminal appeal deserves to be allowed and the impugned order may be set aside and consequently, the appellant deserves to be enlarged on bail. Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the prayer by submitting that the appellant is involved in committing the offence, wherein the injured persons have received injuries. The learned trial court has appreciated the prosecution version in a rightful manner, therefore, the appellant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail and the instant criminal appeal deserves to be dismissed. However, he has been unable to dispute the other factual submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of material available on record, including the allegations made in the FIR, it is apparent that 8 accused persons are named in the FIR and no specific role has been assigned to the present appellant; five accused persons have been granted bail by this Court; two co-accused persons, namely, Paras Saroj and Samkalli @ Shyamkalli, having similar role to that of present appellant, have also been enlarged on bail; the appellant is languishing in jail since 25.04.2025 having no criminal history to his credit and he has CRLA No. 2377 of 2025 2 undertaken that in case the appellant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate with the trial. Without expressing any opinion on merit, this Court is of the view that the learned court below has failed to appreciate the material available on record, thus, the order passed by the court below is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. Consequently, the impugned order dated 20.05.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Pratapgarh in Bail No. 1481 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 58 of 2022, under Sections 147/148/323/325/304/452/504/506 IPC, Police Station Kandhai, District Pratapgarh, is hereby set aside. Let the appellant-Ram Khelawan be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- and two reliable sureties relating to his family members to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to following additional conditions- (i) The appellant shall cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial (iii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(s). (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence. (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. (vi) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. (vii) The appellant shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. (viii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.PC. CRLA No. 2377 of 2025 3 In case of default of above conditions, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observation(s) made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation(s) made in this order. October 9, 2025 kkv/ CRLA No. 2377 of 2025 4 (Pramod Kumar Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench