HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1139 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By means of instant appeal under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 the appellant has challenged the impugned order dated 07.03.2025 passed by the Additional District and Session Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Court No. 45, Barabanki in Bail Application No. 738 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 66 of 2025 under Sections 70(2), 115(2), 351(3) BNS and 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act & Section 5g/6 POCSO Act, P.S.-Ramsanehighat, District- Barabanki. 3. While pressing the instant appeal seeking bail, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that co-accused namely Sunil @ Machauna, having similar role, has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 15.10.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 6648 of 2025. Relevant paragraph of the order dated 15.10.2025 reads as under:- "3. Learned counsel for the applicant argues that in terms of the FIR it was alleged that the daughter of the informant was caught hold by the applicant and because of shame she consumed poison. Subsequently the statement of the victim was recorded under Section 183 BNSS wherein she did not support the prosecution story. 4. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application. 5. Considering the said statement not supporting the prosecution story, however, without commenting upon the merits of the case, the applicant who is in jail since 16.2.2025 and has no criminal history is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed." Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Anil Kumar Nishad, Ram Milan Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Ambuj Kumar Manoj @ Manoj Kumar .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) 4. Thus, taking note of aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, indulgence of this Court is required in the matter and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed. 5. Learned A.G.A. and Sri Ambuj Kumar, Advocate, vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant, however, they could not dispute the above contentions made by the appellant's counsel, including that co-accused namely Sunil @ Machauna, having similar role, has already been enlarged on bail by this Court. 6. Considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A., and gone through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R. as well as other relevant documents, including that co-accused namely Sunil @ Machauna, having similar role, has already been enlarged on bail by this Court. 7. Upon due consideration of above facts and circumstances including the statement(s) of the victim and contents of the FIR as also keeping in view the fact that the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, this Court is of the view that the appeal has substance and it is accordingly, allowed. 8. The impugned order dated 07.03.2025 passed by the Additional District and Session Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Court No. 45, Barabanki in Bail Application No. 738 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 66 of 2025 under Sections 70(2), 115(2), 351(3) BNS and 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act & Section 5g/6 POCSO Act, P.S.-Ramsanehighat, District- Barabanki, is hereby set aside. 9. Let appellant-Manoj @ Manoj Kumar be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on her furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions :- (i) The appellant will cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. (iii) The appellant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(es). (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 CRLA No. 1139 of 2025 2 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 will 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.P.C. 10. As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observations 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 made in this order. November 12, 2025 Vinay/- CRLA No. 1139 of 2025 3 (Saurabh Lavania,J.) Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench