Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:140626 Court No. - 83 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4837 of 2025 Appellant :- Sonu Vishwakarma Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Sanjay Singh,Shivam Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Hanuman Prasad Mishra Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J. 1. In this case notice has already been served upon the informant. 2. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant-Sonu Vishwakarma to set aside the order dated 09.12.2024 in Bail Application No.1210 of 2025 and to release him on bail in Case Crime No.271 of 2024, under Sections 366, 376, 342, 323, 504, 506 IPC & Section 3(2)(V) S.C./S.T. Act, P.S. Utraon, District Prayagraj. 3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, the learned AGA for the State-respondent no.1, Hanuman Prasad Mishra for the informant and perused the entire record. 4. According to the prosecution case, the incident took place on 11.06.2024 but the FIR of this case has been lodged on 09.12.2024 more than one month delay without any plausible explanation stating therein that the appellant giving assurance for performing marriage with her sister enticed away. The age of the victim is between 18-20 years and according to her statement recorded under sections 180 and 183 B.N.S.S. the victim had left her parental house on her own free will. 5. Submission of learned counsel for the appellant is 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. Further submission is that the prosecution story is totally false and fabricated. The victim as well as appellant have performed marriage in a temple. The victim has also accepted that the appellant has given her sim card after marriage. According to medical examination report no external or internal injury was found on the body of the victim. Due to some dispute, the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The date of birth of the victim is 09.05.2003. No any medical report is supported the prosecution story. Essential ingredients to constitute the offence under the SC/ST Act are lacking in the matter. Appellant is languishing in jail since 10.12.2024. Further submission is that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court. 6. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 opposing the prayer for bail had have submitted that the appellant committed the present offence having knowledge that the victim belonged to S.C./S.T. Community. There is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order. 7. 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. 8. 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. 9. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is hereby set-aside. 10. Let the appellant-Sonu Vishwakarma 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. (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. 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 18.8.2025 RPD Digitally signed by :- RATAN PRAKASH DWIVEDI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad