HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4553 of 2025 Court No. - 87 HON'BLE ANIL KUMAR-X, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for appellant which is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for appellant, learned counsel for informant and the learned AGA for State. 3. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of The Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been preferred by the appellant-Virendra with the prayer to allow the appeal, set aside the bail rejection order dated 28.01.2025 passed by the learned court of Special Judge SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Court No. 02, Shahjahanpur, in Bail Application No. 3687 of 2024, (Virendra Vs State), arising out of Case Crime No. 265 of 2024, Under Sections 105, 115(2), 352, 61(2) of B.N.S. & Section 3(2)(V) व 3 (1) द, ध SC/ST ACT, Police Station Jaitipur, District- Shahjahanpur. 4. As per FIR, father of informant Shyam Lal had gone to his fields on 22.9.2024. Accused Om Prakash and Brajesh came there alongwith two unknown persons and all of them started assaulting his father. They also abused his father by referring to his caste. When informant came to know about the incident, he went at spot and took his father to police station and later on his father succumbed to his injuries on 23.9.2024. 5. Learned counsel for appellant has submitted that the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of confessional statement of co- accused. Appellant has no concern with the alleged incident, therefore, he is Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Shobh Nath Pal, Tripurari Pal Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Shaheen Baano Virendra .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) entitled for bail. 6. Learned AGA for State and the learned counsel for informant have opposed the bail of the appellant. It was submitted that deceased Shyam Lal was brutally assaulted by appellant and other co-accused persons which resulted into his death on the very next day. Learned counsel for informant has also submitted that even after the said incident, one of accused Om Prakash managed to escape from clutches of law and his name was dropped from the charge-sheet. Even informant and his family members were threatened by Om Prakash either to compromise in the matter or to face consequence. Hence, another FIR against them has also been lodged against Om Prakash and other accused persons belonging to his family. 7. I have considered the rival submissions so made and have gone through the entire record. 8. Apart from confessional statement of one of accused Om Prakash, no other evidence to indicate the complicity of appellant is on record. 9. 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 appellants have made out a case for bail. 10. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside. 11. Let the appellant- Virendra involved in Bail Application No. 3687 of 2024, (Virendra Vs State), arising out of Case Crime No. 265 of 2024, Under Sections 105, 115(2), 352, 61(2) of B.N.S. & Section 3(2)(V) व 3 (1) द, ध SC/ST ACT, Police Station Jaitipur, District- Shahjahanpur, 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. CRLA No. 4553 of 2025 2 (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. 12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the concerned Court shall be at liberty to take appropriate coercive action for appearance of the accused or to cancel the bail granted. (Anil Kumar-X,J.) October 8, 2025 Mukesh CRLA No. 4553 of 2025 3 Digitally signed by :- MUKESH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad