HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 6256 of 2025 Court No. - 83 HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J. 1. Heard Mr. Jitendra Singh, learned counsel for the appellants, Mr. Ram Badan Maurya holding brief of Mr. Rajesh Kumar Yadav and learned AGA as well as perused the entire record. 2. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellants- Pooja Gupta, Rekha Gupta, Naresh Gupta and Bhola Gupta to set aside the bail rejection orders dated 24.06.2025 & 24.06.2025 passed by Special Judge S.C./S.T. (P.A.) Act, Kaushambi in Bail Application No. 117 of 2025 (Pooja & another Vs. State of U.P. & another) and Bail Application No. 118 of 2025 (Naresh &, another Vs. State of U.P. & another), arising out of Case Crime No. 420 of 2023, under Section 304 IPC & Section-3(2)5 SC/ST Act, Police Station- Sarai Akil, District- Kaushambi. 3. As per prosecution version, the informant lodged the impugned FIR on 19.10.2023 against the 04 persons in relation of the incident taken place on dated 18.10.2023 at about 07.00 p.m., when his sister/deceased stood in front of her house at same time appellant started teasing her sister because his sister's neck has been effected esophagus and when her sister restrain to Naresh Gupta for teasing then he abused and used caste indicating words and entered into house and beaten her with Danda to her sister and her mother and during this assault the other named co-accused persons also committed mar-pit with his parents and upon hearing hue and cry, the informant reached at the incident place and carried his parent Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Jitendra Singh, Sonam Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Rajesh Kumar Yadav, Ram Badan Maurya Pooja Gupta And 3 Others .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) to Primary Health at CHC Sarai Akil and their treatment is going on. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case with the ulterior motive. The applicants have not committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR. He submits that initially, the impugned FIR was lodged under Sections 308, 452, 506, 504, 323 IPC and Section 3(1)(Gh), 3(2)(va) SC/ST Act and after about five months, after death of the injured, the same have been converted into Section 304 IPC and Section 3(2)(5) SC/ST Act. He further submits that due to village party bandi, the entire family members have been falsely implicated in the present case. There is no specific role have been assigned to all the accused appellants, and only general role has been assigned to all the accused/appellants. He further submits that deceased died due to ill treatment. As per post-mortem report, cause of death is septic shock as a result of anti morterm old injuries. He further submits that from the date of alleged incident to till death of the deceased, no statement was recorded of the deceased. There is no independent witness of the incident as well as there is no direct or indirect evidence against the appellants. He further submits that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellants suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court. Appellants is languishing in jail since 12.4.2025 having no criminal history. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A. have opposed the prayer for bail. 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, role assigned to the present appellants and the nature of injury, the Court is of the opinion that the appellants have made out a case for bail. The Court below erred in rejecting the bail application of the appellants. The impugned orders suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same are CRLA No. 6256 of 2025 2 liable to be set-aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed. 8. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned orders rejecting the bail application of the appellants are hereby set-aside. 9. Let the appellants- Pooja Gupta, Rekha Gupta, Naresh Gupta and Bhola Gupta, 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 appellants will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The appellants will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The appellants will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. (iv) The appellants 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 appellants 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. 10. 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 19, 2025 Krishna* CRLA No. 6256 of 2025 3 (Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad