Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:13408 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 7966 of 2024 Appellant :- Sikandar Yadav Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Mohit Kumar Singh,Sujata Choudhary Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Vijay Kumar Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record. Supplementary affidavit filed by the appellant and counter affidavit affidavit filed by the learned A.G.A. are taken 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- Sikandar Yadav with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 16.7.2024 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Agra in Bail Application No.3740 of 2024. 3. The major victim was taken by the present accused appellant to his house and committed rape with her on 26.5.2024 at 0.45 am. FIR was lodged and now the charge sheet has been submitted. 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 as a matter of fact both the parties of this matter are major and were having some love affairs prior to the incident. It is further submitted that the prosecution story is not probable and natural in the FIR. It is alleged that the girl was taken to the house of the accused by him where all his family members reside. It is also submitted that medical report does not corroborate the prosecution version. It is also submitted that during disposal of bail application before the trial Court the counter affidavit was submitted by the victim herself wherein she admitted her affair with the appellant and denied the incident and almost the same version has been made by the victim of this case in the short counter affidavit filed before this Court. It is further submitted that it is a case of consensual relationship and no offence of rape is made out against the appellant as alleged by the prosecution. 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 26.6.20240. 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 informant 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 16.7.2024 but however it was admitted by the learned counsel for the informant that it was a case of consensual relationship and no rape was committed. 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 considering that there are some twisted statements made by the victim in Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. and in the counter affidavit submitted before this Court as well, 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 - Sikandar Yadav involved in Case Crime No. 312 of 2024 under Sections 376, 342, 323 I.P.C. & Section 3(2)(V) SC/ST Act, Police Station - Tajganj, District- Agra 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 :- 27.1.2025 Fhd Digitally signed by :- FAHAD NIYAZ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad