Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:161720 Court No. - 83 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4005 of 2025 Appellant :- Vikram Nishad Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Ashok Kumar Mishra,Krishna Kant Tiwari,Sharad Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J. 1. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the complainant has been died and the holding brief of Sri Anjeet Singh has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of the respondent, under section 2(Wa), the same is taken on record. Learned counsel for the appellant has no objection. 2. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant Vikram Nishad to set aside the order dated 07.04.2025 in Bail Application No. 504 of 25 and to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 20 of 2025, under Sections 64(1), 351(3), 352 of BNS and section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(S) and Section 3(2)(V) S.C./S.T. Act, P.S. Kishanpur, District Fatehpur. 3.Heard learned counsel for the appellant, the learned counsel for the respondent as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the entire record. 4. According to the prosecution case, the FIR has been lodged on 07.02.2025 in respect of the incident which had occurred on 17.01.2025 after about 21 days of the incident without any plausible explanation by the victim, who has now died, stating therein that the day of incident she has gone for call of nature out side her house and also appellant outraged her modesty and committed marpeet with her. 5. Submission of learned counsel for the appellant is that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The appellant has not committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR. Further submission is that the prosecution story is totally false and fabricated. Essential ingredients to constitute the offence under the SC/ST Act are lacking in the matter. Appellant is languishing in jail since 28.02.2025. The victim is major and married lady and there is no evidence against the appellant. The medical examination of the prosecutrix conducted at District Women Hospital at Fatehpur is also not supporting the prosecution story. The victim is major and married lady. The appellant has been falsely implicated in the present due to village Pradhani election and the criminal history of one case has been shown against the appellant in which the final report has been filed. Charges has not been framed so far. Further submission is that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court. 6. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 opposing the prayer for bail submitted that the appellant committed the present offence having knowledge that the victim belonged to S.C./S.T. Community. There is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order. 7. 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. 8. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, role assigned to the present appellant and the nature of injury, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The Court below erred in rejecting the bail application of the appellant. The impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set-aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed. 9. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is hereby set-aside. 10. Let the appellant-Vikram Nishad involved in aforesaid case crime number 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 CRLA No. 4005 of 2025 2 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. 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 11.9.2025 RPD CRLA No. 4005 of 2025 3 Digitally signed by :- RATAN PRAKASH DWIVEDI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- RATAN PRAKASH DWIVEDI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad