Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:29733 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3138 of 2024 Appellant :- Shadab Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Mohd. Nasim Ahmad,Prateek Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- Ankit Tiwari,G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant - Shadab with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 28.2.2024 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Muzaffarnagar and to release the appellant on bail in case crime no. 29 of 2024 under Sections 304, 308, 286 IPC, 3(2) (V) SC/ST Act, 14 Child Labour Act and 9B(i)(k)(kha) and (3)M(ii) Explosive Act P.S. Khatauli, District Muzaffarnagar. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the informant / opposite party no.2 and the learned AGA and perused the entire record. 3. The prosecution story, as unfolded in the F.I.R., is that the named accused Shadab took away two minor sons of the informant, who belonged to SC/ST community and when the kids did not return, an attempt to make contact on phone was made but in vain. The accused had taken away both the kids to his house for packing the crackers without informing their family members. Subsequently a blast was made in his house on 22.1.2024 at 7.00 p.m. and both the children died and one person Bittu received serious burn injuries. F.I.R. was lodged and after investigation charge sheet has been submitted. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He has not committed the present offence. Alleged offences are not attracted against him. It is further submitted that the appellant has no concern at all with the alleged offence. It is further submitted that the factual matrix of this case is that Paras and Dipanshu, the minor sons of the informant, had come to the house of the appellant to purchase the crackers but the accused was not at home and when his servant Bittu took them in the upper side of the house to show carakers, Dipanshu started smoking there and when he threw the biri it fell in the crackers which caught fire and blast was made. It is further submitted that it is wrong to say that the accused appellant is engaged in selling the crackers and he collected the crackers in his house in a large quantity. It is also submitted that his uncle Hasin @ Bhura has licence to keep and sell the crackers and the present appellant has no concern with the same. He had no intention or motive to do away with the kids. The case against the appellant may travel maximum within the purview of Section 304-A IPC. It is also submitted that the appellant is in jail since 24.1.2024. It is further submitted that the appellant has no criminal history to his credit. The Court concerned while passing the impugned order did not take into account the facts and evidence available on record in right perspective and erred in passing the same. It is lastly submitted that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court. 5. On the other hand, learned AGA and learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 / informant opposing the prayer submitted that there is ample evidence on record that the appellant had taken away both the kids without permission of their family members and a go-down has been made on the roof of the appellant where in a huge quantity the crackers were kept. It is also submitted that co- accused Haseen @ Bhura had approached this Court vide Criminal Appeal No. 5449 of 2024 which has been dismissed on 6.8.2024 by the coordinate Bench of this Court. A specific eye account witness for taking away the kids of the informant is available on record. Offence committed by the appellant is very serious and grievous. There is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order and appeal deserves to be dismissed. 6. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record including the impugned order carefully. 7. It appears from the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and from perusal of material on record that the Court concerned has properly considered the case of the appellant while deciding the bail application. Hence, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and the fact that the accused appellant took away the deceased who were kids of tender age for packing of the crackers in itself was a serious crime and the incident happened in his house where crackers were kept, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has not made out a case for bail. The Court concerned passed a reasoned order while rejecting the bail application of the appellant. The impugned order does not suffer from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be affirmed and the appeal is liable to be dismissed. 8. Accordingly, the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is affirmed and the appeal is dismissed. Order Date :- 3.3.2025 safi Digitally signed by :- MAHBOOB SAFI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad