Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:135659 Court No. - 83 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 967 of 2025 Appellant :- Vijay Alias Shailesh Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Narendra Nath Tripathi,Rupa Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Praveen Kumar,Priya Tiwari Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J. 1. Notice has been served on respondent No. 2 personally. 2. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant-Vijay alias Shailesh to set aside the order dated 12.11.2024 in IInd Bail Application No.2022 of 2024 and to release him on bail in Case Crime No.148 of 2023, under section 147, 149, 504, 506, 304 IPC and section 3(2)V S/ST Act, Police Station Rajgarh, District Mirzapur. 3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, the learned AGA for the State-respondent, Sri Praveen Kumar for the informant and perused the entire record. 4. According to the prosecution case, the FIR was lodged on 23.10.2023 at 17.30 P.M. in respect of the incident which had occurred on 22.10.2023 at about 14.200 P.M. stating therein that the accused appellants along with co-accused came to his house abused him in filthy language regarding his caste and assaulted, so he sustained injuries and his treatment is going on in Metro Hospital, Varanasi and accused persons also threatened him to dire consequences. 5. Submission of learned counsel for the appellant is 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. Further submission is that the prosecution story is totally false and fabricated. Learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that during course of investigation, the statement of inured Shivpati Koari was not recorded by the I.O. The deceased has died after month of the incident due to lunges infection. It is next submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the deceased has sustained three injuries and all were in simple in nature. In the present case eleven witnesses have been examined but till date no witness has been produced. In the present case co-accused Raju Yadav has been released on bail on 22.02.2024. Essential ingredients to constitute the offence under the SC/ST Act are lacking in the matter. Appellant is languishing in jail since 02.02.2024. Further submission is that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court. 6. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 opposing the prayer for bail had have submitted that the appellant committed the present offence having knowledge that the victim belonged to S.C./S.T. Community. There is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order. 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, 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-Vijay alias Shailesh 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. (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. Order Date :- 11.8.2025 RPD Digitally signed by :- RATAN PRAKASH DWIVEDI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad