HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4684 of 2025 Court No. - 87 HON'BLE ANIL KUMAR-X, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for appellant and learned AGA for the State. 2. As per office report, notice has been served on opposite party no. 2, however, none has appeared on behalf of opposite party no.2 to oppose the appeal. 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 - Saddam with the prayer to allow the appeal, set aside the bail rejection order dated 5.5.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act) Azamgarh in Case Crime No. 207/2025, U/s 64(i), 127(3), 87, 352, 351(3) B.N.S. & U/s 3(1)द, 3(1)ध, 3(2)5 SC/ST Act, P.S. Phoolpur, District Azamgarh. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that false allegation of enticing away the daughter of the informant has been made against the appellant. The statement of the victim was recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of BNSS itself indicates that she, along with appellant Saddam and other accused Amindar, had gone to their house. She has also stated that she was in contact with appellant for past six years and both of them used to talk on mobile. However, she has alleged that she was abducted by the appellant and another accused and was taken to the house of Saddam. But when her statement was recorded under Section 183 BNSS, she stated that she was taken by appellant Saddam at his sister's home. She has also stated that when she asked appellant-Saddam to solemnize marriage with her, her proposal was refused, which reflects that both parties were consenting. 5. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer and has submitted that the statement of the victim recorded before the I.O. and Magistrate suggests that she was abducted and raped by the appellant. Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Janardan Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Saddam .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) 6. I have considered the rival submissions so made and have gone through the entire record. 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, severity of punishment, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail. 8. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside. 9. Let the appellant Saddam involved in Case Crime No. 207/2025, U/s 64(i), 127(3), 87, 352, 351(3) B.N.S. & U/s 3(1)द, 3(1)ध, 3(2)5 SC/ST Act, P.S. Phoolpur, District Azamgarh, 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. (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 court concerned shall be at liberty to take appropriate coercive action for appearance of the accused or to cancel the bail granted. October 9, 2025 Ujjawal CRLA No. 4684 of 2025 2 (Anil Kumar-X,J.) Digitally signed by :- UJJAWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad