HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 11820 of 2023 Court No. - 83 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. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 is not present. 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 07.10.2023 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Jalaun, in Bail Application No. 1606 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 189 of 2023, under Sections 376, 328 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Kotwali Jalaun, District Jalaun. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant-applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant-applicant that victim is major married lady and there are major contradictions in the statements of victim said to have been recorded under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. It is further submitted that applicant is in jail since 6.6.2023 and has no criminal history. It is further submitted that medical also does not support the prosecution case. 4. On the other hand, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the said fact. 5. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record including the Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Jitendra Kumar Ravat, Lakshman Prasad Ojha, Praveen Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Ramesh Chandra Yadav Ramakant Tiwari .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) 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 appellant Ramakant Tiwari, involved in the 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 cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. (iii) The appellant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(es). (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence. (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. (vi) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. (vii) The appellant will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. (viii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. CRLA No. 11820 of 2023 2 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. September 23, 2025 RavindraKSingh CRLA No. 11820 of 2023 3 (Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAVINDRA KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad