HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 7449 of 2025 Court No. - 83 HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J. 1. Mr. Deepak Kumar Tripathi, Advocate has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of the informant/respondent no.2 today in the Court, the same is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 and learned AGA as well as perused the entire record. 3. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant- Naseer Ahmad to set aside the bail rejection impugned order dated 06.03.2025 passed in the Bail Application No. 235 of 2025 (Naseer Ahmad Vs. State of U.P.) arising out of Case Crime No. 460 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 87 B.N.S. and 3(2)(5), 3(2)(Va) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station- Dudhara, District- Sant Kabir Nagar with a further prayer to release the appellant on bail during the pendency of the trial before the court below concerned. 4. As per prosecution story, the informant lodged the impugned FIR on 23.12.2024 alleging therein that on 20.12.2024, minor daughter of the informant has been enticed away by the appellant on the false promise of marriage. 5. 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. As per medical, the victim is major aged about 19 years. As per statement Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Amit Rai, Anup Kumar Shukla Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Naseer Ahmad .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) of the victim recorded under Section 183 BNSS, the victim is well known to the appellant last 4-5 years and on 20.12.2024 at about 11:00 pm, she went to Delhi with the appellant on her own sweet will. There are major contradiction in the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 180 & 183 BNSS. As per medical, there is no internal or external injury found on the body of the victim. He further submits that as per statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 BNSS, the victim is a consenting party and as such, prima facie, no offence under Section 137 (2) BNS is made out against the appellant. 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. Appellant is languishing in jail since 27.12.2024 having no criminal history. 6. Learned counsel for the informant did not oppose the same. 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 as well as victim is a consenting party, 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- Naseer Ahmad, 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. CRLA No. 7449 of 2025 2 (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. September 16, 2025 Krishna* CRLA No. 7449 of 2025 3 (Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad