Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:144801 Court No. - 83 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4370 of 2025 Appellant :- Vimlendra Bhushan Pandey @ Jhingu Pandey And 2 Others Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Rang Nath Pandey,Satyendra Narayan Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. This criminal appeal has been filed by the learned counsel for the appellant under Section 14-A (2) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for setting aside the impugned order dated 23.04.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Sonbhadra in Bail Application No. 626 of 2025, arising of Complaint Case No. 171 of 2023, under Sections 342, 294, 354, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(2)(V-a) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Chopan District Sonbhadra. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellants-applicants has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended that initially FIR was lodged against the appellants on the basis of the false and concocted story in which after investigation Final Report was submitted but on protest, the trial court treated the same as Complaint Case and after recording the statements of the complainant and her witnesses, the appellants have been summoned to face the trial in aforesaid sections and thereafter the appellants applied for bail which has been illegally rejected by the trial court. It is contended by learned counsel for the appellants-applicants that the appellants have not committed any offence. The appellants are in jail since 23.04.2025 and have explained the criminal history by way of supplementary affidavit. It is further submitted that the offence under the provisions of SC/ST Act are not attracted . 4. On the other hand, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail. 5. 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. 6. 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 Court below 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 liable to be allowed. 7. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside. 8. Let the appellants Vimlendra Bhushan Pandey @ Jhingu Pandey, Pankaj Pandey @ Sardendu Bhushan Pandey and Vijay Kumar Mishra, involved in the aforesaid case crime number be released on bail on each of them 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 cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellants will not tamper with the evidence during trial. (iii) The appellants will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(es). (iv) The appellants shall not commit an offence. (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. (vi) The appellants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. (vii) The appellants will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. (viii) The appellants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. 9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before the competent Court. 10. As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observations made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation made in this order. Order Date :- 22.8.2025 RavindraKSingh Digitally signed by :- RAVINDRA KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad