HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 6555 of 2025 Court No. - 83 HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State as well as perused the record. Mr Mohammad Ayub, Advocate has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no. 2 today, which is taken on record. 2. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant- Shivam, to set aside the order dated 02.07.2025 in Bail Application No. 3249 of 2025 and to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 158 of 2023, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 308, 504 IPC and Section 3(1) (r)(s), 3(2)(va) of SC/ ST Act, P.S. Fatehabad, District Agra. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The appellant is in jail since 26.05.2025. It is further contended that similarly placed co-accused persons, namely, Sri Ram and Thakurdas, Charan Singh, Sher Singh, have already been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 13.11.2024, 13.11.2024 and 2.5.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 7047 of 2024, Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 40539 of 2024 & 3468 of 2025 respectively, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. 4. I have perused the bail orders of the co-accused and find that the role assigned to the present appellant is almost similar to that of co-accused persons, who have already been granted bail by this Court. Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Dharmendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Shivam .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) 5. On the other hand, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has opposed the application for bail but could not dispute the submission raised by learned counsel for the appellant. 6. 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 and the nature of injury, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail. 7. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is hereby set-aside. 8. Let the appellant- Shivam, 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. (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. 9. 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 1, 2025 RavindraKSingh CRLA No. 6555 of 2025 2 (Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAVINDRA KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad