Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:67029 Court No. - 80 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3935 of 2025 Appellant :- Rajesh Kumar Sharma Alias Fokkhan Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Ajay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record. Supplementary affidavit explaining the criminal history filed today is taken on record. 2. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant - Rajesh Kumar Sharma Alias Fokkhan with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 3.3.2025 passed by the learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Kaushambi in Bail Application No. 185 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime No. 0172 of 2023 under Sections 354B, 406, 504, 506 I.P.C. & Section 3(1)(dha), 3(2)(V) SC/ST Act, Police Station - Sarai Akil, District- Kaushambi. 3. The accused persons had borrowed some money from the informant for the sake of sale of some land and when she demanded the same the present accused appellant tried to outrage the modesty of the lady informant in his own house and also hurled abuses by caste related remarks as she was a member of SC/ST community. FIR was lodged and now the 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. Essential ingredients to establish an offence under SC/ST Act are also missing in this case. It is further submitted that the victim of this case was examined before the trial Court as P.W.1 and she turned hostile and did not support the prosecution version on any point. It is further submitted that since the victim of this case herself is a hostile witness and denies the whole incident the accused appellant is entitled for bail. Appellant is in jail since 27.2.2025. 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 counsel for the informant and learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but they could not dispute this factual aspect of the matter that the victim of this case as P.W.1 has deposed in favour of the appellant and did not support the prosecution version. 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. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The trial Court erred in rejecting the bail application. The impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set-aside and the appeal is to be allowed. 8. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is, hereby, set-aside. 9. Let the above named appellant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy 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 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. 10. 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 :- 30.4.2025 Fhd Digitally signed by :- FAHAD NIYAZ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad