HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 224 of 2025 Court No. - 83 HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the informant and learned AGA for the State as well as perused the record. 2. This Criminal appeal under Section 14-A(1) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been filed by the appellant- Aman Saxena against the bail rejection order dated 03.12.2024, passed by learned the Special Judge (SC/ST Act)/Additional Session Judge, Meerut in Bail Application No.7329 of 2024, (Aman Saxena Vs. State of U.P.) arising out of Case Crime No. 164 of 2024, under Sections 64, 351 (2) B.N.S. and 3(2)5 of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station- Kotwali, District- Meerut with a further prayer to release the appellant on bail during pendency of the trial before the court below. 3. As per prosecution story, on 14.11.2024, the victim herself lodged the impugned FIR against the appellant alleging therein that the applicant made a call to the victim for employment in Shop for that he has taken the documents on 03.09.2024 and on 05.10.2024, the applicant again call to the victim and thereafter he has gone with victim in a room and committed the alleged offence and he has also made video. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant is that the appellant submits 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. Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Arvind Kumar Srivastava, Byas Kumar Prasad, Manish Kumar Singh, Sunil Kumar Saroj Counsel for Respondent(s) : Anil Kumar Jaiswal, G.A. Aman Saxena .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) The FIR is delayed more than one month. The victim is married lady aged about 19 years. As per statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 BNSS, the victim is a consenting party. The victim went with the appellant on her own sweet will. As per medical, there is no internal or external injury found on the body of the victim. There are major contradictions in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 & 183 B.N.S.S. He further submits that charge sheet has been submitted and trial has not been started yet, therefore, there is no possibility of conclusion of trial in near future. Appellant is languishing in jail since 16.11.2024 having no previous criminal history. He further submits that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court. 5. Learned counsel for the informant did not oppose the prayer for bail. 6. I have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record including the impugned judgment. 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, role assigned to the present appellant as well as victim is a consenting party, 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. 8. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is hereby set-aside. 9. Let the appellant- Aman Saxena, 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. CRLA No. 224 of 2025 2 (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. September 16, 2025 Krishna* CRLA No. 224 of 2025 3 (Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad