Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:14315 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 9428 of 2024 Appellant :- Eliyas Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Nisheeth Yadav,Satya Narayan Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. with Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 9474 of 2024 Appellant :- Bhuvnesh Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Brajesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. with Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 10366 of 2024 Appellant :- Sher Nabi Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Brijesh Kumar Pal,Ajay Vikram Yadav,Devendra Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record. 2. These criminal appeals under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellants - Eliyas, Bhuvnesh, Sher Nabi with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection orders dated 7.9.2024, 9.9.2024 and 19.9.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Firozabad. 3. The prosecution case as culled out from the FIR is that when the lady victim of this case had a quarrel with her husband she came to Shikohabad from district Firozabad and there one unknown person took her to the house of Seema on 5.8.2024 at about 12 noon and rape was committed to her by four unknown persons at different times. FIR was lodged and the victim was medically examined. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that the appellants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. They have not committed the present offence. Alleged offences are not attracted against them. Essential ingredients to establish an offence under SC/ST Act are also missing in this case. It is further submitted that the prosecution story is highly suspicious and not plausible. It is not natural at all that one Manoj, who was absolutely unknown for the victim took her to the house of Seema, the co-accused, and the victim without having any acquaintance with the said Manoj agreed to go with him to the house of Seema. It is further submitted that there are material contradictions in the statements of prosecutrix herself made under Section 180 and 183 of BNSS. It is also submitted that the medical evidence also does not corroborate the prosecution version and the doctor who medically examined the victim has opined that no sexual assault has been committed with the victim. It is also submitted that there is nothing on record to show as to how accused Ilyas, Sher Nabi and Bhuvnesh were known to the victim of this case. 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. Appellants Eliyas, Bhuvnesh, Sher Nabi are in jail since 7.8.2024, 7.8.2024 and 6.8.2024. It is lastly submitted that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellants suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court. 5. On the other hand, learned AGA opposing the prayer for bail submitted that the appellants 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 7.9.2024, 9.9.2024 and 19.9.2024. 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, the Court is of the opinion that the appellants have 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 appeals are allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellants are, hereby, set- aside. 9. Let the appellants - Eliyas, Bhuvnesh, Sher Nabi involved in Case Crime No. 473 of 2024 under Sections 64, 127 (1), 351 (2), 61(2) B.N.S. & Section 3(2)(V) SC/ST Act, Police Station - Shikohabad, District- Firozabad 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 appellants will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The appellants will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The appellants will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. (iv) The appellants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected. (v) The appellants 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 them 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 :- 31.1.2025 Fhd Digitally signed by :- FAHAD NIYAZ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad