Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:11461 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 6976 of 2024 Appellant :- Ankur Yadav Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Vipul Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Amit Prakash Upadhyay,G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the respondent no.2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record. 2. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant - Ankur Yadav with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 21.6.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Azamgarh in Bail Application No.1002609 of 2024. 3. The major victim of this case was physically molested by the present accused appellant on the basis of some obscene video. Despite several requests made by the victim the video was not deleted and on the basis of same the appellant developed physical relations with the victim and at one point of time her pregnancy was also terminated. The incident continued till 28.2.2024, however, FIR was lodged on 12.5.2024. Now the charge sheet has been submitted against the appellant. 4. 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 both the parties of this case are major persons. The applicant before this Court is a bachelor boy and the victim is also unmarried. It is further submitted that no obscene video was ever prepared by the accused appellant nor it was made viral on social media. It is also submitted that as per FIR version the incident started in the year 2022 but surprisingly the FIR was lodged in the month of May, 2024. It is also submitted that it is a case of consensual relations. As a matter of fact the lady victim was having affair with some other person and when it was protested by the accused appellant a false FIR was lodged against him. It is also submitted that the applicant has no criminal history to his credit. 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 17.5.2024. 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. 5. On the other hand, learned AGA and learned counsel for the respondent no.2 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 21.6.2024. It is further submitted that the obscene video in respect of the prosecutrix was prepared by the accused appellant and it was also made viral on social media like face book. 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, and also keeping in view the fact that the victim is an unmarried major lady and, prima facie, it appears a case of consensual relationship, 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. 8. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is, hereby, set-aside. 9. Let the appellant - Ankur Yadav involved in Case Crime No. 165 of 2024 under Sections 376, 506 I.P.C. & Section 3(1)(da), 3(1)(dha), 3(2)(V) SC/ST Act and 67 of I.T. Act, Police Station- Atrauliya, District- Azamgarh 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. 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. Order Date :- 23.1.2025 Fhd Digitally signed by :- FAHAD NIYAZ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- FAHAD NIYAZ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad