HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5282 of 2025 Court No. - 87 HON'BLE ANIL KUMAR-X, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for appellant and learned AGA for the State. 2. Learned AGA has informed the Court that notice has been served on opposite party no. 2, however, none has appeared on his behalf. 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 - Nizamuddin Ansari @ Golu with the prayer to allow the appeal, set aside the bail rejection order dated 20.5.2025 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Gorakhpur, in Case Crime No. 43 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 352, 115(2), 324(2), 109(1), 351(3), 3(5) BNS & Section 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va), 3(1)da, dha, SC/ST Act, Police Station - Gorakhnath, District – Gorakhpur. 4. It has been alleged in the FIR that informant Ramesh and his brother-in- law-Shrinath Paswan, had gone to a marriage hall on 3.9.2025. When they were about to park their vehicle inside the marriage hall, the guard of the marriage hall and 5-6 unknown persons started abusing them. Guard who knew them before this incident, as the informant had been at the marriage hall for its booking, started abusing him by referring to his caste. Guard and other unknown accused assaulted the informant and his brother-in-law. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant and other accused persons named in the FIR were not aware of the caste of the informant and his brother-in-law. Certain dispute between the parties had occurred due to certain other reasons. However, the informant has given a false colour to this incident by mentioning that he was abused by the appellant on the grounds that he belongs to the community of SC/ST. It was further submitted that the injuries sustained by the injured Shrinath Paswan are not grievous in nature. 6. Learned counsel for the informant and learned AGA have opposed the bail and submitted that the informant and his brother-in-law were humiliated and abused by the appellant because they belong to the community of Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Yogesh Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Ravindra Prakash Srivastava Nizamuddin Ansari @ Golu .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) SC/ST. Moreover, the injury report of Shrinath Paswan indicates that he had suffered ten injuries on her body. CT scan report also suggests that he had suffered a fracture on his head. 7. I have considered the rival submissions so made and have gone through the entire record. 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, severity of punishment, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail. 9. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside. 10. Let the appellant Nizamuddin Ansari @ Golu involved in Case Crime No. 43 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 352, 115(2), 324(2), 109(1), 351(3), 3(5) BNS & Section 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va), 3(1)da, dha, SC/ST Act, Police Station - Gorakhnath, District – Gorakhpur, 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 court concerned shall be at liberty to take appropriate coercive action for appearance of the accused or to cancel the bail granted. October 7, 2025 Ujjawal CRLA No. 5282 of 2025 2 (Anil Kumar-X,J.) Digitally signed by :- UJJAWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad