HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4605 of 2025 Court No. - 83 HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned AGA as well as perused the entire record. 2. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant- Ramesh Chandra to set aside impugned bail rejection order dated 04.04.2025 passed by learned Additional Session Judge/Special Judge S.C./S.T. (Prevention and Atrocities) Act Mainpuri in bail application No. 641 of 2025 (Ramesh Chandra Vs. State of U.P.) arising out of Case Crime No. 371 of 2023, under Sections 302 and 201 I.P.C. and section 3 (2) V of S.C./S.T. (P.A.) Act, Police Station- Bichhwa, District- Mainpuri. 3. As per prosecution story, it is alleged in the F.I.R. that brother of informant namely Sunny, aged about 34 years, was running a D.J. shop and fooding, lodging and sleeping in the house of Ramesh Chandra (applicant) on rent near Hannukhera Adda. On 30.10.2023 at about 4.00 O'clock the accused persons came to shop of his brother and committed Marpeet. The said information was given by shop owner Premlata wife of Late Shivram, then the informant came there, but his brother not met him and when he inquired in the matter then accused person did not tell about him and on 31.10.2023 at about 06.30 O'clock dead body of his brother was found in Jhadi near Nagla Bagiya. It is also alleged that the accused persons have push the neck of his brother and killed him and thrown the dead body. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Sudhir Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Ramesh Chandra .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) and has been falsely implicated in this case. The appellant has not committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR. He further submits that there is no direct or indirect evidence found against the appellant. As per post- mortem report, cause of death is as asphyxia due to anti mortem strangulation. Nothing has been recovered from the possession or pointing out of the appellant. There is no independent witness of the alleged incident. He further submits that there are 21 witnesses and only four witnesses have been examined before the trial court and they have not supported the prosecution story, therefore, there is no possibility of conclusion of trial in near future. Appellant is languishing in jail since 5.11.2023 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. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. 6. 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. 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 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. 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- Ramesh Chandra, 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. 4605 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 18, 2025 Krishna* CRLA No. 4605 of 2025 3 (Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad