Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:14012 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 8448 of 2024 Appellant :- Chotu@ Faizan @ Farzan Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Hemant Sharma,Saurabh Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. Despite service of notice, none is present on behalf of opposite party no.2. 2. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. 3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record. 4. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant Chotu@ Faizan @ Farzan with the prayer to allow the appeal, set aside the bail rejection order dated 13.8.2024 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Kasganj and to release the appellant on bail in Case Crime No.528 of 2024 under Sections 307, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. & Section 3(2)5 SC/ST Act, Police Station - Khurja Nagar, District - Bulandshahar. 5. As per prosecution version, Hoti Lal, the cousin of the informant, was assaulted bitterly by the named accused persons and several blows were made upon his head with the but of country made pistol. Fire was also made with intention to kill but however it was missed. Some caste related remarks were also made by the accused persons on spot. Injured Hoti Lal sustained grievous injuries. FIR was lodged and injured was medically examined. 6. 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. It is further submitted that the prosecution story is totally false and fabricated. No specific role of assault has been assigned to any of the accused persons. Even in the statement of injured Hoti Lal it has not been clarified as to who was the person who caused injury upon his head with the butt of country made pistol. It is also submitted that the role of firing has been assigned to the present appellant by the injured in the aforesaid statement but as a matter of fact, no firearm injury has been found by the doctor. It is also submitted that only two injuries were found on the body of the injured and both were simple in nature as opined by the doctor himself. It is also submitted that the criminal history of the appellant is sufficiently explained. It is also submitted that 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 21.6.2024. 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. 7. On the other hand, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but however he could not dispute this factual aspect of the matter that no firearm injury has been caused to the injured of this case and the doctor has opined that the nature of the injuries was simple. 8. 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. 9. 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, 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 liable to be allowed. 10. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is, hereby, set-aside. 11. Let the appellant - Chotu@ Faizan @ Farzan involved in Case Crime No.528 of 2024 under Sections 307, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. & Section 3(2)5 SC/ST Act, Police Station - Khurja Nagar, District - Bulandshahar 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. 12. 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 ss Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad