Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:140614 Court No. - 83 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 6751 of 2025 Appellant :- Arjun Sharma Alias Arjun Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Abhishek Kumar Pandey,Birendra Singh,Vinayak Ranjan,Yash Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J. 1. Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh has filed vakalatnama on behalf of respondent today, 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-Arjun Sharma @ Arjun to set aside the order dated 02.07.2025 to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 49 of 2025, under Sections 64(1) of B.N.S., P.S. Ahrauli Bazar, District Kushinagar. 3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, the learned AGA for the State-respondent no.1 and perused the entire record. 4. According to the prosecution case, in the present case FIR of the case has been lodged on the same day stating therein that when her mother aged about 60 years went in her field, the appellant came there and fell her down, the mother of the informant and entered the finger in her private part. At that time the appellant was under intoxication. 5. Submission of learned counsel for the appellant is 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. Further submission is that the prosecution story is totally false and fabricated. The victim is aged about 60 years but under section 183 she stated her age 70 years. The victim has also refused for her medical examination report. The victim has also stated that before last four days she was also sexually assaulted by the appellant. The appellant is aged about 24 years. There is no independent witness of the alleged incident. No injury was found on the body of the victim. No any medical report is supported the prosecution story. Essential ingredients to constitute the offence under the SC/ST Act are lacking in the matter. Appellant is languishing in jail since 15.02.2025. Further submission is 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 A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 opposing the prayer for bail had have submitted that the appellant committed the present offence having knowledge that the victim belonged to S.C./S.T. Community. There is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order. 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, 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. 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. 9. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is hereby set-aside. 10. Let the appellant-Arjun Sharma @ Arjun 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. 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 :- 18.8.2025 RPD Digitally signed by :- RATAN PRAKASH DWIVEDI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad