HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5116 of 2025 Court No. - 87 HON'BLE ANIL KUMAR-X, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for appellant, learned counsel for the informant and learned AGA for the State are present. 2. 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 - Bhanu Raikwar with the prayer to allow the appeal, set aside the bail rejection order dated 13.5.2025 passed by learned Special Judge Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Jhansi, in Case Crime No. 136 of 2025, under Sections 3(5), 109(1), 352, 351(2) BNS & Section 3(2)(5) SC/ST Act, Police Station - Sipari Bazar, District – Jhansi. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that he has been falsely implicated in this case by the informant, who has concocted a false story against him. Informant in his FIR has stated that accused Bhanu Raikwar, Chandan Rajput, and Raj Ahirwar, came on motorcycle. Chandan Rajput pulled out a country-made gun and fired upon him. But when statement of the informant was recorded by the I.O., he disowned his version and stated that Chandan Rajput was not involved in the occurrence rather, it was stated that shot was fired by one Rahul, whose name was not even mentioned in the FIR. Even though no injury was sustained by the informant or other person in the incident, yet the appellant was falsely roped in this case. 4. Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer. 5. I have considered the rival submissions so made and have gone through Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Om Prakash, Vikas Tiwari Counsel for Respondent(s) : Ashish Kumar Maurya, G.A., Kunwar Abhishek Bhanu Raikwar .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) the entire record. 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. 7. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside. 8. Let the appellant Bhanu Raikwar involved in Case Crime No. 136 of 2025, under Sections 3(5), 109(1), 352, 351(2) BNS & Section 3(2)(5) SC/ST Act, Police Station - Sipari Bazar, District – Jhansi, 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. 9. 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 8, 2025 Ujjawal CRLA No. 5116 of 2025 2 (Anil Kumar-X,J.) Digitally signed by :- UJJAWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad