HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5516 of 2026 Along with : 1. Criminal Appeal No. 5793 of 2026: Vipin Versus State of U.P. and another 2. Criminal Appeal No. 6176 of 2026: Aman Kumar @ Tagharu Versus State of U.P. and another 3. Criminal Appeal No. 6189 of 2026: Rajendra Tiwari Versus State of U.P. and another Court No. - 76 HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Manvendra Singh, learned counsel for the appellant- Rakesh Kumar; Sri Ram Krishna Yadav, learned counsel for the appellant- Vipin; Sri Ramesh Chandra Upadhyay, Advocate holding brief of Sri Rakesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the appellants- Aman Kumar @ Tagharu and Rajendra Tiwari and Sri Ajay Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for the State in all the matters and perused the record. 3. Vide orders dated 03.06.2026, 09.06.2026, 24.06.2026 and 24.06.2026 notice was issued to the opposite party no. 2 in all the matters. As per the office reports dated 08.07.2026, 10.07.2026, 14.07.2026 and 14.07.2026 notice has been served personally upon the opposite party no. 2. Despite Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Manvendra Singh, Rajendra Prasad Pandey, Rakesh Kumar Pandey, Ram Krishna Yadav, Subhash Chandra Yadav Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Rakesh Kumar .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and another .....Respondent(s) service of notice, no one appears on behalf of the opposite party no.2. 4. All the appeals with the prayer for bail are connected together and are being decided by a common order. 5. The Criminal Appeal No. 5516 of 2026 under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant- Rakesh Kumar with the prayer to set aside the order dated 03.04.2026 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge / Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Fatehpur in Bail Application No. 470 / 2026 (Rakesh Kumar Vs. State of U.P.) arising out of Case Crime No. 37 of 2026, under Sections 191 (2), 115 (2), 105 B.N.S. and Section 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Asothar, District Fatehpur, with a further prayer to release the appellant on bail in the aforesaid case during the pendency of trial. 6. The Criminal Appeal No. 5793 of 2026 under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant- Vipin, with the prayer to set aside the order dated 04.05.2026 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge / Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Fatehpur in Second Bail Application No. 784 / 2026 arising out of Case Crime No. 37 of 2026, under Sections 3(5), 105, 115 (2) B.N.S. and Section 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Asothar, District Fatehpur, with a further prayer to release the appellant on bail in the aforesaid case during the pendency of the present appeal. 7. The Criminal Appeal Nos. 6176 of 2026 and 6189 of 2026 under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act have been preferred by the appellants- Aman Kumar @ Tagharu and Rajendra Tiwari, with the prayer to set aside the orders dated 21.04.2026 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Fatehpur in Bail Application No. 642 / 2026 (Rajendra Tiwari and Another Vs. State of U.P.) arising out of Case Crime No. 37 of 2026, under Sections 115 (2), 105, 3(5) BNS and Section 3(2)(5), 3(2)(5क) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Asothar, District Fatehpur, with a further prayer to release the appellants on bail in the aforesaid case during the pendency of the present appeal. 8. The first information report of the present matter was lodged on 08.03.2026 by Smt. Chandi Devi against the appellants, Brahmesh, Shiva and Ashish alleging therein that on 05.03.2026 at about 5.30 pm the accused CRLA No. 5516 of 2026 2 and two unknown persons assaulted Kuldeep due to which he received injuries. On 07.03.2026 he was taken to CHC, Sarai Khalis and admitted there where looking to his critical condition he was referred to District Hospital, Fatehpur and then referred to Hallet Hospital, Kanpur. When he was being taken to Kanpur he died on the way and police on 112 was informed who informed the SHO concerned. A report be lodged and action be taken. 9. The postmortem examination of Kuldeep was conducted on 08.03.2026 in which the doctor found the following injuries:- "1. Injury No. 1. Stitched wound of size 2 cm x 1 cm present on left side forehead number of stitches two. 2. Injury No 2, Abrasion of size 3 cm X 2 cm present on left shoulder 3. Injury No. 3, Abrasion with scar mark of size 3 cm x 2 cm present on right knee joint in brownish colour 4. Injury No.4, Abrasion with scar mark of size 2 cm x 1 cm, 3 cm X 2 cm present on left knee joint in brownish colour 5. Injury No.5, Contusion of size 3 cm X 4 cm present on left scapula and 3 cm X 2 cm present on left side chest region in blackish colour 6 Injury No.6, Abrasion with scar mark of size 2 cm x 2 cm present on right greater toe 7. Injury No.7, Contusion of size 3 cm X 2 cm present on right side chest and 4 cm X 2 cm present on right scapula in blackish colour 8. Injury No.8, Contusion of size 3 cm x 4 cm present on left occipital region 9. Injury No.9, Abrasion of size 1 cm X 0.5 cm present on left ear 10. Injury No 10, On dissection of neck in v shape layer by layer hematoma present in between lyringo hyoid complex and cervical vertebrae at places." 10. The cause of death was opined as:- "Could not be ascertained hence viscera, blood sample and stomach content preserved for chemical analysis and alcoholic examination, nail clipping and nail scraping preserved for skin tissue and other foreign body traces, blood sample and urine sample preserved for alcoholic examination and concentration traces" 11. The viscera report has been filed by the State a perusal of which would go to show that the sample of blood and urine of the deceased was sent for chemical examination in which no chemical poison was found as per the CRLA No. 5516 of 2026 3 report dated 19.08.2026. 12. Learned counsels for the appellants submitted that the appellants have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that common & general have been assigned to the appellants and three other persons. It is submitted that in so far as the injuries received by the injured are concerned, the injury no.1 was on the left side forehead which was stitched wound and in the internal examination the meninges were found lacerated whereas all the other injuries were having no internal damage. It is submitted that doctor did not opine regarding the cause of death of the deceased and viscera was preserved which also did not find anything in it. It is submitted that as per the prosecution case the present incident occurred on 05.03.2026 but the injured Kuldeep was taken to the CHC on 07.03.2026 for the first time. It is submitted that the first information report has been lodged after an inordinate delay of 03 days. It is further submitted that the investigation in the matter has concluded and a charge-sheet dated 21.04.2026 has been submitted and thus there are no chances of the appellants tampering with evidence. It is submitted that there is no specific role assigned to the appellants. The appellants Rakesh Kumar and Vipin have no criminal history as stated in para 24, 33 of their affidavits and are in jail since 09.03.2026. The appellant Aman Kumar @ Tagharu has criminal history of three cases as stated in paragraph 21 of the affidavit and paragraph 03 of the supplementary affidavit dated 01.09.2026 and is in jail since 08.04.2026. The appellant Rajendra Tiwari has criminal history of two cases as stated in paragraph 22 of the affidavit and is in jail since 09.03.2026. 13. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the appellants are named in the first information report and have been assigned the role of assault on the deceased Kuldeep along with three other persons. It is submitted that the deceased was found to have received 10 injuries on his person and thus it cannot be said that the present incident did not occur and further that there was no role to the accused persons since the number of injuries exceed the number of accused named in the first information report which is 07 in number. It is submitted that the prayer for bail be dismissed. 14. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the accused-appellants and 03 others have been assigned general and omnibus allegations of assault on Kuldeep. The cause CRLA No. 5516 of 2026 4 of death could not be ascertained and viscera was preserved. The viscera report does not show anything in it. The first information report has been lodged after an unexplained delay of 03 days. The deceased was taken to the hospital at the first instance after 02 days of the alleged incident. 15. 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 appellants may be enlarged on bail. 16. Let the appellants- Rakesh Kumar, Vipin, Aman Kumar @ Tagharu and Rajendra Tiwari 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 appellants will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. (ii) The appellants 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 appellants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 appellants will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the appellants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under section 84 B.N.S.S., 2023 may be issued and if appellants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under section 209 B.N.S., 2023. (v) The appellants 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 351 B.N.S.S., 2023. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the appellants is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of CRLA No. 5516 of 2026 5 liberty of bail and proceed against them in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against them under Section 269 B.N.S., 2023. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the appellants. 17. 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 appellants to prison. 18. Accordingly, the appeals succeed and the same stands allowed. 19. The impugned orders dated 03.04.2026, 04.05.2026, 21.04.2026 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge / Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Fatehpur of the aforesaid cases are hereby set aside. 20. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. September 21, 2026 AS Rathore CRLA No. 5516 of 2026 6 (Samit Gopal,J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad