HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5319 of 2025 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. 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 30.04.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Ghaziabad in Case Crime No. 538 of 2024, under Sections 64(2)m, 316(2), 351(2), 115(2) BNS and Section 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act and Section 3/5/1 of UP Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, P.S. Tilamod, District Ghaziabad. 3. The prosecution's case is, in brief, that the complainant filed a report at Tila Mod Police Station on 10.12.2024 at 3:35 PM alleging therein that the complainant's husband was a taxi driver. The accused, Riyazuddin, took advantage of her husband, got a new Ola car for him, and made him drive it. The car had a monthly installment of ₹11,500, which the complainant's husband paid. After nine installments were paid, Riyazuddin pressured him to pay the remaining installments in a lump sum. When the complainant and her husband said they could not pay the full amount at once and would continue with monthly payments, Riyazuddin disagreed and threatened to kill the husband. Due to fear, the husband left his wife (the complainant) and has been missing for a year and a half. Afterward, Riyazuddin and his wife, took control Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Afzal Ahmad Khan Durrani, Rohit Sharma Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Riyazuddin .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) of the complainant. Riyazuddin took possession of her gold and silver jewelry, worth ₹2.5 lakhs, and began to have forced physical relations with her. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant- applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the applicant was granted anticipatory bail during the course of investigation and after the charge sheet in the matter is filed he surrendered before the court below. It is further submitted that the applicant never forced the complainant into conversion or sexual relations. It is further submitted that the appellant and the complainant had been in a live-in relationship since 27.04.2024, for which a notarized agreement was also executed, which itself shows that victim was a consenting party. It is further submitted that the victim has been medically examined in which no injury was seen. The complainant had even taken around ₹2,50,000/- through online transactions and about ₹7,50,000/- in cash from the accused. The applicant voluntarily surrendered before the Court on 04.03.2025. He has no criminal history and is ready to cooperate with the Court. 5. On the other hand, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the said fact. 6. 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. 7. 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. 8. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside. 9. Let the appellant Riyazuddin, involved in the aforesaid case crime CRLA No. 5319 of 2025 2 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. 10. 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. 11. 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 22, 2025 RavindraKSingh CRLA No. 5319 of 2025 3 (Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAVINDRA KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- RAVINDRA KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad