Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:140332 Court No. - 83 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4071 of 2025 Appellant :- Grijesh Yadav And 3 Others Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Arvind Kumar Srivastava,Atmaram Nadiwal,Bhaju Ram Pprasad Sharma,Dinesh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Muhammad Azam Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J. 1. In this case notice has already been served upon the informant. 2. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellants- Grijesh Yadav, Gokulchand, Paschupati Yadav and Gorakh Yadav to set aside the order dated 11.04.2025 in Bail Application No.432 of 2025 and to release him on bail in Case Crime No.206 of 2024, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 427, 457, 507 IPC and section 3(1)s, 292))(va SC/ST Act, P.S. Ghughali, District Mahrajganj. 3. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, the learned AGA for the State-respondent no.1 and perused the entire record. 4. According to the prosecution case, the FIR has been lodged on 15.05.2024 in respect of the incident which had taken place on 11.05.2024 stating therein that in the present incident eight named accused along with 551 unknown persons came at the village armed with knife, rod and punch and started marpeet with them, they also looted the ornaments and ran away from the place of the incident. They also dialed 112 but police has not come for his safety. 5. Submission of learned counsel for the appellants is that the appellants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. The appellants have not committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR. Further submission is that the prosecution story is totally false and fabricated. There also contradictions in the the statement of the informant recorded under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. In the present case, informant has also sustained injuries, but all were are simple in nature. In the first information report no specific dis-closer against the appellants about alleged offence and there is no specific allegation with regard to causing injury shewn in the allegation. No any medical report is supported the prosecution story. Essential ingredients to constitute the offence under the SC/ST Act are lacking in the matter. Appellant is languishing in jail since 11.04.2025. 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 had have 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 appellants-Grijesh Yadav, Gokulchand, Pashupati Yadav and Gorakh Yadav 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 appellants will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The appellants will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The appellants will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. (iv) The appellants 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 appellants 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 :- 18.8.2025 RPD Digitally signed by :- RATAN PRAKASH DWIVEDI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad