HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3869 of 2025 Court No. - 83 HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit on behalf of the appellant and Counter affidavits have been filed on behalf of the State as well as informant today in the Court, the same are taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant and learned AGA for the State as well as perused the record. 3. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant- Abdul Hannan to set aside the impugned bail rejection order dated 27-03-2025 passed by Special judge S.C.S.T. (P.A. Act) Bijnor in criminal Misc Bail Application No 1671 of 2025 arising out of in Case Crime No. 564 of 2024, under Sections 103(1), 191(2), 190,3(5),61(2), B.N.S. and Section 3(2)5, S.C.S.T. Act, section 35 Arms Act, Police Station- Dhampur, District- Bijnor. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The appellant is in jail since 19.12.2024 having criminal history of 11 cases, which have been explained in paragraph no.3 to the supplementary affidavit. 5. It is further contended that similarly placed co-accused persons, namely, Aakash Saini and Vishal Kumar, have already been granted bail Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Akhilesh Kumar Yadav, Arvind Kumar Srivastava, Manoj Kumar Tripathi, Vinod Kumar Tirpathi Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Praveen Kumar Abdul Hannan .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) by co-ordinate Bench as well as by this Court vide orders dated 12.9.2025 and 17.6.2025 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 5264 of 2025 and 1848 of 2025, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. 6. I have perused the bail order of the co-accused and find that the role assigned to the present appellant is almost similar to that of co-accused person, who has already been granted bail by this Court. 7. On the other hand, learned AGA has opposed the application for bail but could not dispute the submission raised by learned counsel for the appellant. 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. 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- Abdul Hannan, 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 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, CRLA No. 3869 of 2025 2 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. September 18, 2025 Krishna* CRLA No. 3869 of 2025 3 (Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad