Rajesh & Anr. v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko & Anr.

: Satish Kumar Srivastava, Ashish Kumar Sharma, Bajhul Quamar Siddiqui, Dinesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Court No. - 11 HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J.

Case called out. No-one appeared on behalf of opposite party no.2/complainant despite service of notice, as appears from Annexure No. CA-1 to the counter affidavit of State and Office Report dated 28.05.2025. Learned AGA is present in the Court. In these circumstances, the Court proceeded to hear the appeal on merits.

Heard Shri B.Q. Siddiqui, learned counsel for the appellants, Shri Ajay Kumar Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short 'SC/ST Act') against the impugned order dated 18.02.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), District- Lucknow in Bail Application No.886 of 2025, arising out of FIR/Case Crime No.38 of 2025, under Sections- 105, 352 B.N.S. and Section- 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Gosaiganj, District- Lucknow.

While pressing the present appeal, it is submitted that the appellants are innocent and the allegations levelled in the FIR are completely false.

It is further submitted that if the story of the prosecution is taken on its face value then the case of the prosecution would fall under Section 304 Part II I.P.C. and in this view of the matter, ultimately, the benefit of Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 would be extended to the appellants at the conclusion of trial, if the case is proved against the appellants, as the appellants are 2 CRLA No. 1423 of 2025 having no criminal history.

It is further submitted that in fact the appellants have not committed any crime as alleged as there is no direct witness to support the story of the prosecution against the appellants and the appellants are in jail since

25.01.2025.

It is further stated that the cause of death could not be ascertained and as such viscera was preserved and till date the F.S.L. Report has not been received. In these circumstances, the present appeal is liable to be allowed and the impugned order may be set aside and the appellants be enlarged on bail.

Learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail, however, he could not dispute the aforesaid contentions of counsel for the appellants.

Considered the submissions advanced by the counsel for the appellants, learned A.G.A. for the State and all the relevant documents placed on record.

Upon due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of counsel for the appellants and learned A.G.A., impugned order, taking note of the allegations levelled in the FIR as also the facts as stated, that (i) if the story of the prosecution is taken to its face value then the case of the prosecution would fall under Section 304 Part II I.P.C. and ultimately, the benefit of Probation of Offenders Act 1958 would be extended to the appellants at the conclusion of trial, if the case is proved against the appellants; (ii) there is no direct witness to support the story of the prosecution against the appellants; (iii) the cause of death could not be ascertained and as such viscera was preserved and till date the F.S.L. Report has not been received (iv) the final hearing in this appeal in near future is bleak, this Court finds that the present appeal is liable to be allowed. Accordingly, it is allowed.

Order dated 18.02.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), District- Lucknow in Bail Application No.886 of 2025, arising out of FIR/Case Crime No.38 of 2025, under Sections- 105, 352 B.N.S. and Section- 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Gosaiganj, District- Lucknow is hereby set aside.

Let the appellants- Rajesh and Jitendra be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on their furnishing personal bonds of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) and two reliable sureties 3 CRLA No. 1423 of 2025 each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions :- (i) The appellants shall cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellants shall not tamper with the evidence during trial. (iii) The appellants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(s). (iv) The appellants shall not commit an offence. (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. (vi) The appellants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel. (vii) The appellants shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. (viii) The appellants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

In case of default of above conditions, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

As this order relates to enlargement of the appellants on bail, it is clarified that observation(s) 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(s) made in this order. September 26, 2025 Anand/- (Saurabh Lavania,J.) ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench