Akash And Another v. State of U.P. And Another). Relevant portion of the order dated

Appellant :- Ram Lakhan Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Vineet Kumar Mishra,Malti Mishra,Mohd Kamal Khan Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Aakash Srivastava Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

1. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

2. The service upon opposite party No.2 is sufficient, as appears from the Office report dated 02.05.2025 and Anneuxre No.CA- 1 to the counter affidavit of State, however, today when the case called out, no one appeared on behalf of opposite party No.2 to oppose the present appeal.

3. In the aforesaid background of the case, the Court proceeded to hear the appeal on merits.

4. By means of instant appeal under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 the appellant has challenged the impugned order dated 20.03.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Hardoi, in Bail Application No. 404 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 21 of 2025 under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3), 140(1), 127(2) BNS 2023 and Section 3(1)Da, 3(2)V of SC/ST Act, P.S.-Sursa, District- Hardoi.

5. It is stated that if the case of prosecution is taken on its face value, then in that eventuality, it can be inferred that the appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case.

6. Further stated that co-accused namely Akash and Lali similarly situated, have already been released on bail by this Court in terms of order dated 04.06.2025 passed in CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 789 of 2025 (Akash And Another vs. State of U.P. And Another). Relevant portion of the order dated 04.06.2025 is extracted here-in-under:- "3. As per contents of FIR, incident is said to have taken place on 30.01.2025 at about 10.00 A.M. when the nominated person Ram Lakhan alongwith co-accused is said to have abducted the informant and subsequently attacked and severely injured him.

4. It is submitted that appellants have been falsely implicated in allegations levelled against them which could be evident from the fact that they have not been named in the FIR and even a bare perusal of FIR clearly indicates that there is no aspect relatable to the SC/ST Act. It is only in the subsequent statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that a general allegation of caste based epithet having been made has been alleged as an afterthought. It is submitted that even the injury report does not corroborate allegations levelled against appellants. It is submitted that appellants do not have any previous criminal history.

5. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of opposite party-State has opposed the bail application with the submission that single injury indicated in injury report corroborates allegations levelled against them and charge-sheet has thereafter been filed. It is however admitted that appellants do not have any previous criminal history.

6. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties, perusal of material available on record and without commenting upon merits, it appears that there is certain contradiction in the contents of FIR with the statement of victim recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C., particularly with regard to allegations levelled under the SC/ST Act which would inquire consideration by trial court. The injury report also does not appear to support allegations levelled. Appellants are under incarceration since 30.01.2025. Appellants do not have any previous criminal history."

7. As such, the appellant, who is in jail since 30.01.2025, is also entitled for bail and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

8. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant, however, he could not dispute the fact that the co- accused namely Akash and Lali similarly situated, have already been enlarged on bail by this Court.

9. Considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant-applicant, learned A.G.A., and gone through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R. as also that co-accused namely Akash and Lali have already been released on bail by this Court as well as other relevant documents including the statement(s) recorded by the Investigating Officer during investigation.

10. Upon due consideration of above facts and circumstances as also keeping in view the fact that the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, this Court is of the view that the appeal has substance and it is accordingly, allowed.

11. The order dated 20.03.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Hardoi, in Bail Application No. 404 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 21 of 2025 under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3), 140(1), 127(2) BNS 2023 and Section 3(1)Da, 3(2)V of SC/ST Act, P.S.-Sursa, District-Hardoi, is hereby set aside.

12. Let appellant-Ram Lakhan, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions :- (i) The appellant will cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. (iii) The appellant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(es). (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence. (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. (vi) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. (vii) The appellant will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. (viii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

13. As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observations made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation made in this order. Order Date :- 10.7.2025 Vinay/- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Appellant :- Ram Lakhan Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Vineet Kumar Mishra,Malti Mishra,Mohd Kamal Khan Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Aakash Srivastava Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

1. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

2. The service upon opposite party No.2 is sufficient, as appears from the Office report dated 02.05.2025 and Anneuxre No.CA- 1 to the counter affidavit of State, however, today when the case called out, no one appeared on behalf of opposite party No.2 to oppose the present appeal.

3. In the aforesaid background of the case, the Court proceeded to hear the appeal on merits.

4. By means of instant appeal under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 the appellant has challenged the impugned order dated 20.03.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Hardoi, in Bail Application No. 404 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 21 of 2025 under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3), 140(1), 127(2) BNS 2023 and Section 3(1)Da, 3(2)V of SC/ST Act, P.S.-Sursa, District- Hardoi.

5. It is stated that if the case of prosecution is taken on its face value, then in that eventuality, it can be inferred that the appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case.

6. Further stated that co-accused namely Akash and Lali similarly situated, have already been released on bail by this Court in terms of order dated 04.06.2025 passed in CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 789 of 2025 (Akash And Another vs. State of U.P. And Another). Relevant portion of the order dated 04.06.2025 is extracted here-in-under:- "3. As per contents of FIR, incident is said to have taken place on 30.01.2025 at about 10.00 A.M. when the nominated person Ram Lakhan alongwith co-accused is said to have abducted the informant and subsequently attacked and severely injured him.

4. It is submitted that appellants have been falsely implicated in allegations levelled against them which could be evident from the fact that they have not been named in the FIR and even a bare perusal of FIR clearly indicates that there is no aspect relatable to the SC/ST Act. It is only in the subsequent statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that a general allegation of caste based epithet having been made has been alleged as an afterthought. It is submitted that even the injury report does not corroborate allegations levelled against appellants. It is submitted that appellants do not have any previous criminal history.

5. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of opposite party-State has opposed the bail application with the submission that single injury indicated in injury report corroborates allegations levelled against them and charge-sheet has thereafter been filed. It is however admitted that appellants do not have any previous criminal history.

6. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties, perusal of material available on record and without commenting upon merits, it appears that there is certain contradiction in the contents of FIR with the statement of victim recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C., particularly with regard to allegations levelled under the SC/ST Act which would inquire consideration by trial court. The injury report also does not appear to support allegations levelled. Appellants are under incarceration since 30.01.2025. Appellants do not have any previous criminal history."

7. As such, the appellant, who is in jail since 30.01.2025, is also entitled for bail and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

8. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant, however, he could not dispute the fact that the co- accused namely Akash and Lali similarly situated, have already been enlarged on bail by this Court.

9. Considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant-applicant, learned A.G.A., and gone through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R. as also that co-accused namely Akash and Lali have already been released on bail by this Court as well as other relevant documents including the statement(s) recorded by the Investigating Officer during investigation.

10. Upon due consideration of above facts and circumstances as also keeping in view the fact that the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, this Court is of the view that the appeal has substance and it is accordingly, allowed.

11. The order dated 20.03.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Hardoi, in Bail Application No. 404 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 21 of 2025 under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(3), 140(1), 127(2) BNS 2023 and Section 3(1)Da, 3(2)V of SC/ST Act, P.S.-Sursa, District-Hardoi, is hereby set aside.

12. Let appellant-Ram Lakhan, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions :- (i) The appellant will cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. (iii) The appellant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(es). (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence. (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. (vi) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. (vii) The appellant will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. (viii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

13. As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observations made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation made in this order. Order Date :- 10.7.2025 Vinay/- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench