HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3130 of 2026 Court No. - 75 HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri N.I. Jafri, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Devendra Mani Tripathi, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Deepak Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2/first informant and Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the record. 3. This criminal appeal under Section 14A(2) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been filed by the appellant Faiz @ Shahfaiz with the prayer to set-aside the impugned order dated 25.2.2026 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Prayagraj in Bail Application No. 663 of 2026 (Faiz@Shahfaiz Vs. State of U.P. and another) arising out of Case Crime No. 342 of 2025, under Sections 103(1), 352, 191(2), 3(5) BNS and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Dhoomanganj, District Prayagraj, and with a further prayer to release the appellant on bail in the aforesaid case. 4. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 21.10.2025 by Narendra Kumar@Rajan Pasi/opposite party no. 2, naming the appellant as Kaif along with 06 other persons and 3-4 unknown persons, alleging therein that on 21.10.2025 at about 01:15 p.m. his brother Ravendra Kumar went from the house to Mundera Chungi Petrol Pump for purchasing petrol where the accused were lying in wait, started abusing him and used caste related words and assaulted him with stones. All the accused exhorted and then together assaulted him with stones and murdered him. Even prior he had given information to the police that some untoward incident may take place but no action has been taken. His report be lodged and action be taken. 5. The deceased Ravendra Kumar @ Munnu was found to have received three injuries on his person which are as follows:- Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Devendra Mani Tripathi Counsel for Respondent(s) : Deepak Kumar Singh, G.A. Faiz @ Shahfaiz .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) "1. Abraded contusion 06cm x 03cm on right side forehead, 1.5cm at right eyebrow. 2. Abrasion 02cm x 01cm at right side face just outer aspect of right eye. 3. Lacerated wound 04cm x 02cm x bone deep on left side back of skull in occipital area with contused swelling 08cm x 05cm all around lacerated wound, 07cm behind left ear. " Internal damage under the scalp is laceration and hematoma was present. Brain was also found to have hematoma. Base of skull was fractured. Cause of death was opined as coma due to ante mortem head injuries as noted. 6. Investigation in the matter has concluded and a charge sheet dated 14.1.2026 has been submitted against Nurain, Ali, Kamran, Irfan Ahmad, Mohd. Hussain, Faiz@Shafaiz(the present applicant), Faisal @Kale for the offences under Sections 103(1), 352, 191(2), 3(5) BNS and 3(2)V S.C./S.T. Act, copy of the charge sheet has been annexed as annexure no. S.A.-3 to the supplementary affidavit dated 04.5.2026, which is on the record. 7. Submission of learned counsel for the appellant is that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that CCTV footage of the place of occurrence was collected by the Investigating Officer pertaining to recording of 21.10.2025 of 11.53.32 hours and 12.50.32 hours in which the appellant was not seen whereas co-accused Faisal@Kale and Ali were seen assaulting the deceased. It is submitted that thus implication of the appellant in the present matter is not borne out from the said CCTV footage. It is submitted that there is no specific role assigned to the appellant in the present matter and common and general role of assault upon the deceased has been assigned to 7 named persons including the appellant and 3-4 unknown persons of assaulted with bricks but the same did not corroborate with the post mortem examination report inasmuch as only three injuries were found on the person of the deceased. Further it is submitted that co-accused Mohd. Hussain has been granted bail vide order dated 20.2.2026 passed by another Bench of this Court in Criminal Appeal No.149 of 2026, copy of the said order has been annexed as annexure no. 6 to the affidavit in support of bail application. While placing para-2 of the supplementary affidavit dated 04.5.2026 it is submitted that after the present case the police has shown recovery of country made pistol of .315 bore and 2 live cartridges from the appellant and F.I.R. as Case Crime No. 0399 of 2025, under Section 3/25 Arms Act, Police Station Dhoomanganj, District Commissionerate Prayagraj (Nagar) has been lodged on 09.12.2025, copy of the said F.I.R. has been annexed as Annexure No.S.A.-1 to the said supplementary affidavit. It is submitted that the present appeal be allowed and the appellant be released on bail. The appellant is in jail since 09.12.2025. CRLA No. 3130 of 2026 2 8. Per contra, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and State opposed the appeal and prayer for bail and submitted that as per spot inspection and site plan the present incident took place at three places and point seen on the site plan it is mentioned that the same is the place where the accused were lying in wait of the deceased. It is submitted that participation of the accused-appellant is there in the matter. 9. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that common and general role has been assigned to the appellant and other named persons along with three-four unknown persons of assault with stone on the deceased Ravendra Kumar. He was found to have received three injuries on his person. The same does not corroborate with the prosecution version of assault by 7 named and 3-4 unknown persons collectively. The appellant is not identified in the CCTV footage of the place of occurrence in which co-accused Ali and Faisal@Kale have been identified and seen assaulting the deceased. The case of the appellant is distinguishable with that of the co-accused Ali and Faisal@Kale. The co-accused Mohd. Hussain has been granted bail. 10. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the appellant may be enlarged on bail. 11. Let the appellant- Faiz @ Shahfaiz, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- i) The appellant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. ii) The appellant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iv) The appellant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the appellant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 84 BNSS/82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if appellant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall CRLA No. 3130 of 2026 3 initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under section 209 BNS/174-A I.P.C. (v) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 251 BNSS/313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the appellant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 BNS/229-A IPC. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the appellant. 12. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the appellant to prison. 13. Accordingly, the appeal succeeds and the same stands allowed. 14. The impugned order dated 25.2.2026 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Prayagraj is hereby set aside. May 6, 2026 Naresh CRLA No. 3130 of 2026 4 (Samit Gopal,J.) Digitally signed by :- NARESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad