HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4172 of 2026 Court No. - 76 HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Pradeep Mishra, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Subhash Chandra, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the record. 3. Ms. Manshi Upadhyay and Sri Shashi Shekhar Maurya, learned counsels for the opposite party no. 2 are not present even when the matter has been taken up in the revised list. 4. This criminal appeal under Section 14A(2) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been filed by the appellant- Manish Kumar Gupta alias Manish Gupta, with the prayer to set-aside the impugned order dated 28.3.2026 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Kushi Nagar at Padrauna in Bail Application No. 638 of 2026 (Manish Kumar Gupta@Manish Gupta Vs. State of U.P. and another) arising out of Case Crime No. 443 of 2025, under Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Kotwali Hata, District- Kushi Nagar, with a further prayer to release the appellant on bail in the aforesaid case. 5. Submission of learned counsel for the appellant is that the appellant was granted bail vide order dated 09.03.2026 under Sections 103(1), 61(2) BNS, passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.38314 of 2025. The said order reads as under:- " 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Ashok Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 443 of 2025, under Sections 103(1), 61(2) BNS, Police Station Kotwali Hata, District Kushinagar, during the pendency of trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Rahul Kumar Gupta, Subhash Chandra Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Manshi Upadhyay, Shashi Shekhar Maurya Manish Kumar Gupta Alias Manish Gupta .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) falsely implicated in the present case. He is not named in the FIR. His name has come up in the confessional statement of the co-accused person, which has no evidentiary value in the eyes of law. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that a false recovery of iron rod has been foisted on the applicant. A witness has been garnered subsequently by the prosecution as an afterthought just to falsely implicate the applicant in the case. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 3.8.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 6. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant could not be disputed. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the fact that the applicant is not named in the FIR and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima-facie the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant- Manish Kumar Gupta Alias Manish Gupta, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his 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 applicant shall not tamper with evidence during trial. (ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 10. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses." 6. It is submitted that during investigation Section 3(2)(5) of S.C./S.T. Act was added and thus charge sheet dated 29.10.2025 was submitted against the appellant under Sections 103(1)/61(2) BNS and Section 3(2)(5) of S.C./S.T. Act. It is submitted that the present appeal with prayer for bail is under added sections pertaining to offence under Section S.C./S.T. Act. It is submitted that there is nothing on record to show that the present incident is alleged to have been committed only because of the reason that the victim happened to be a member of S.C./S.T. community. It is submitted that implication of the appellant in the present matter is without any credible evidence and he has been falsely implicated in the present matter. It is submitted that the appellant has no criminal history as stated in para 43 of the appeal and is in jail since 03.08.2025. 7. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the appeal and prayer for bail. 8. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the appellant was granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 09.03.2026 in another Sections. In the present matter during investigation Section 3(2)(5) of S.C./S.T. Act was added and the present appeal with prayer for bail is under the said sections only. Charge sheet in the matter has been submitted under Sections 103(1)/61(2) BNS and Section 3(2)(5) of S.C./S.T. Act. CRLA No. 4172 of 2026 2 The appellant has no criminal history. 9. 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. 10. Let the appellant- Manish Kumar Gupta alias Manish Gupta, 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 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. 11. 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 CRLA No. 4172 of 2026 3 appellant to prison. 12. Accordingly, the appeal succeeds and the same stands allowed. 13. The impugned order dated 28.3.2026 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Kushi Nagar at Padrauna is hereby set aside. 14. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. September 18, 2026 Naresh CRLA No. 4172 of 2026 4 (Samit Gopal,J.) Digitally signed by :- NARESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad