HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 8141 of 2025 Court No. - 87 HON'BLE ANIL KUMAR-X, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for appellant and the learned AGA for State. 2. As per report, notice has been served on opposite party no. 2, however, none has appeared on behalf of opposite party no.2 to oppose the appeal. 3. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of The Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been preferred by the appellant- Ramesh Kumar Moorjani with the prayer to allow the appeal, set aside the bail rejection order dated 23.4.2025 passed by Special Judge (S.C./S.T.) (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Kanpur Nagar in Bail Application No.1438/2025, (Ramesh Kumar Moorjani Versus State), arising out of Case Crime No.301/2024, under Section 85/80 (2) B.N.S. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act and Section 3(2)V S.C./S.T. Act, at Police Station Kakadev, District-Kanpur Nagar. 4. Learned counsel for appellant has submitted that marriage of Soni Sagar was solemnized with Vasudev. Appellant is father of Vasudev. Certain matrimonial discord between the parties arose after marriage. Later on, Soni Sagar committed suicide and her family members being pained by her death, lodged the present FIR against the appellant and family members on frivolous allegations. Bald and vague allegations have been leveled against all the family members. Appellant is father-in-law of deceased and is aged about 72 years. Smt. Sunita Moorjani, wife of appellant and mother-in-law of deceased was granted bail by this Court in Criminal Appeal No.4158 of 2025. The role of appellant is no different from the co-accused. Hence, the Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Sanjay Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Ramesh Kumar Moorjani .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) appellant is entitled for bail. 5. Learned AGA for State has submitted that allegations regarding demand of dowry and harassment has been made by informant and other witness against the appellant, therefore, he is not entitled for bail. 6. I have considered the rival submissions so made and have gone through the entire record. 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, the Court is of the opinion that the appellants have made out a case for bail. 8. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside. 9. Let the appellant- Ramesh Kumar Moorjani involved in Case Crime No.301/2024, under Section 85/80 (2) B.N.S. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act and Section 3(2)V S.C./S.T. Act, at Police Station Kakadev, District-Kanpur Nagar , 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. 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the concerned Court CRLA No. 8141 of 2025 2 shall be at liberty to take appropriate coercive action for appearance of the accused or to cancel the bail granted. (Anil Kumar-X,J.) October 9, 2025/Mukesh CRLA No. 8141 of 2025 3 Digitally signed by :- MUKESH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad