HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4991 of 2025 Court No. - 83 HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J. 1. Learned counsel for the appellant has filed supplementary affidavit today, taken on 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-Devesh Thakur Alias Tonta to set aside the order dated 13.05.2025 in Bail Application No. 686 of 25 and to release him on bail in Case Crime No.96 of 2025, under Sections 109, 115(2), 352, 351(2) BNS, section 3(1)d, 3(1)dha, 3(2)(v) S.C./S.T. Act, P.S. Chandpa, District Hathras. 3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Sanjay Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for respondent no. 2, the learned AGA for the State- respondent no.1 and perused the entire record. 4. According to the prosecution case, the FIR of the incident has been lodged on the same day by the victim himself i.e. 27.04.2025 stating therein that when he was returning after attending the call of nature, on the way the appellant met him and stated for compromising and committed marpeet with him and thereafter fired on him. 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 Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Ganesh Datta Sharma, Noor Muhammad, Pankaj Sharma, Yogesh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Sanjay Kumar Dubey Devesh Thakur Alias Tonta .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) submission is that the prosecution story is totally false and fabricated. Essential ingredients to constitute the offence under the SC/ST Act are lacking in the matter. Appellant is languishing in jail since 04.05.2025. The appellant is handicapped person and having 40% disability. In the present case no charge has been framed and there is no possibility to conclude the trial in near future. 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-Devesh Thakur Alias Tonta 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. CRLA No. 4991 of 2025 2 (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. September 12, 2025 RPD CRLA No. 4991 of 2025 3 (Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.) Digitally signed by :- RATAN PRAKASH DWIVEDI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad