HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 6618 of 2025 Court No. - 83 HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J. 1. Learned A.G.A. has pointed out that notice has been served to the mother of the victim. 2. Despite service of notice, none present on behalf of the informant. 3. Heard Mr. Sunil Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant and learned AGA as well as perused the entire record. 4. This is second bail application of the appellant. The first bail application was dismissed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.10.2023 passed in Criminal Appeal No.9405 of 2023. 5. The present second criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant- Ujjawal to set aside the bail rejection orders dated 24.01.2024 and 10.06.2025 passed by learned Special Judge S.C.S.T. (P.A.) Act, Saharanpur in Bail Application No.357 of 2024, and 6464 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime No.147 of 2023, under Sections 376, 506, 504, 323, I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va) of The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Police Station- Janakpuri, District- Saharanpur, Police Station- Janakpuri, District- Saharanpur with a further prayer to release the appellant on bail during the pendency of the trial before court below. 6. As per prosecution story, on 18.06.2023, the applicant called the wife of the informant, namely, Ritu to prepare food for the appellant. Thereafter, the wife of the informant went to the house of the appellant at Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Sunil Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Ujjawal .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) about 9:30 am. in the morning to prepare food for him, then the appellant committed rape with the victim. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant is that the appellant submits 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. He submits that the victim is a married lady. He further submits that statement of the victim was recorded before the court below as P.W.2 where she has turned hostile. As per medical, there is no internal or external injury found on the body of the victim. Appellant is languishing in jail since 22.6.2025 having no criminal history. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court. 8. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. 9. 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. 10. 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 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. 11. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is hereby set-aside. 12. Let the appellant- Ujjawal, 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. CRLA No. 6618 of 2025 2 (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. 13. 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 23, 2025 Krishna* CRLA No. 6618 of 2025 3 (Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad