Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:113100 Court No. - 83 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 6099 of 2025 Appellant :- Jay Singh Alias Bholu Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Sandeep Kumar Yadav,Subhash Chandra Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record. 2. As per instruction received by the learned A.G.A. notice upon the informant has been served. 3. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant - Jay Singh Alias Bholu with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 2.6.2025 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Gorakhpur in Bail Application No. 2371 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime No. 106 of 2025 under Sections 137 (2), 87 BNS & Section 3(2)(Va) SC/ST Act, Police Station - Belipaar, District- Gorakhpur. 4. The minor daughter of the informant was abducted by named accused appellant Bholu on 7.4.2025 at about 1.30 pm. FIR was lodged and subsequently the victim was appeared and medically examined. 5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He has not committed the present offence. Alleged offences are not attracted against him. Essential ingredients to establish an offence under SC/ST Act are also missing in this case. It is further submitted that although the victim of this case is a minor girl but she left her house on her own accord and subsequently when she was recovered her statement was recorded by the police under Section 180 BNSS wherein she stated that no sexual offence was committed with her and when her statement under Section 183 BNSS was recorded she again narrated the same story. It is further submitted that in her medical examination nothing adverse was found and a specific statement was made by the victim that the accused appellant did not commit any sexual offence with her. The trial Court while passing the impugned order did not take into account the facts and evidence available on record in right perspective and erred in passing the same. Appellant is in jail since 16.4.2025 having no criminal history. It is lastly submitted 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 AGA opposing the prayer for bail submitted that the appellant committed the present offence having knowledge that the victim belonged to scheduled caste community. There is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order dated 2.6.2025 but however he could not dispute the factual aspect of the matter that the victim herself stated that no physical assault was made with her by the accused appellant and she has specifically denied the offence of rape against her. 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, severity of punishment, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The trial Court 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 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 above named appellant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy 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 :- 15.7.2025 Fhd Digitally signed by :- FAHAD NIYAZ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad