HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 7947 of 2025 Court No. - 83 HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J. 1. Learned A.G.A. has pointed out that notice has been served upon the respondent no.2. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant 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- Sachin Patel to set aside the bail rejection order dated 03.06.2025 passed by Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Bareilly in Bail Application No. 3331 of 2025 (Sachin Patel Versus State of U.P.) arising out of Case Crime No. 292 of 2025, under Section 69 B.N.S and 3(2)V, S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station- Bithri Chainpur, District- Bareilly with a further prayer to release the appellant on bail during the pendency of the trial before court below. 4. As per prosecution story, the victim herself lodged the impugned FIR against the appellant alleging therein that the appellant trapped her in a love trap about 5 years ago and promised to marry her. It is also alleged that the appellant used to take the victim out for walks, to his home and also used to visit the applicant's house. Taking the victim into confidence, the appellant continuously had relations with her without her consent. It is further alleged that on 20.04.2025, when the victim went to appellant's house to ask her mother for marriage, her mother, brother and maternal uncle also refused to marry with the appellant and also abused her by using caste-related words and threatened to kill her. Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Amit Tiwari Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Sachin Patel .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) 5. Learned counsel for 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. The impugned FIR is delayed about more than one month and there is no explanation for the said delay. The appellant and the victim are major. As per statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 BNSS, the victim is well known to the appellant since five years and she is a consenting party and she herself went with the victim at several places and established physical relation on her own sweet will. There are major contradictions in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 & 183 B.N.S.S.. As per statement of the victim, victim is a consenting party, therefore, no offence is made out against the appellant. Further, learned counsel for the appellant assured the Court that after release from jail, the appellant will solemnize marriage with the victim thereafter, they shall get their marriage registered and will get marriage certificate from the Marriage Registrar. 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 18.6.2025 having no criminal history. 6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A. have opposed the prayer for bail. 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 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- Sachin Patel, involved in aforesaid case crime number CRLA No. 7947 of 2025 2 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. September 26, 2025 Krishna* CRLA No. 7947 of 2025 3 (Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad