LUCKNOW vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

3. 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 07.07.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Raebareli in Bail Application No.1406 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime No.0139 of 2025, under Sections 140(1) Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (in short "B.N.S.") and Sections 3(2)(v) S.C/S.T Act, P.S.- Unchahar, District- Raebareli.

4. For the purposes of seeking bail, it is submitted that the appellant is a lady aged about 45 years wife of co-accused Mohd. Jamal Anwar @ Jamal @ Afzal (indicated in the F.I.R as Jamal @ Afzal @ Mohd. Jamal Anwar) is languishing in jail since 24.04.2025 and taking note of the period of incarceration as also spirit of Section 482 BNSS akin to Section 437 Cr.P.C (now repealed), the appellant be released on bail.

5. It is further stated that the story of the prosecution is completely false and concocted and it would appear from a bare reason the F.I.R and relevant documents on records.

6. In continuation, it is stated that the a written report of missing of Shahsi the opposite party @ Guddu was submitted by no.2/informant, namely Dashrath Lal, R/O Village Bahanpur, P.S. Unchahar, the husband of 2 CRLA No. 2344 of 2025 District Raebareli. NCR was registered at P.S. Unchahar, District Raebareli on 18.03.2025.

7. It is further stated that after the delay of 36 days, the informant has lodged the F.I.R on 14.04.2025 at P.S. Unchahar, District Raebareli, registered as F.I.R No. 0139 of 2025 under Sections 140(1) B.N.S., akin to Section 364 I.P.C (now repealed), and Sections 3(2)(v) S.C/S.T Act, P.S.- Unchahar, District- Raebareli. It nutshell, it has been alleged in the F.I.R that the appellant and co-accused Afzal has sold the daughter aged about 22 years of the informant.

8. It is further submitted that statement(s) of independent witnesses, namely, Smt. Rita Devi w/o Dashrath Lal, Chedi LaL s/o Sundar and Usman s/o Khaliq would indicate that all the statements of the independent witnesses are in same tune.

9. It is further stated that infact it is a case of circumstantial evidence and there is no direct link available with the prosecution to connect with the present appellant with crime indicated in the F.I.R, if the case of prosecution is taken on its face value.

10. It is also stated that this Court has protected the interest of the co- accused Mohd. Jamal Afzal husband of the appellant vide order dated

02.09.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 7533 of 2025. The relevant portion of the order referred is reads as under :- "7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that he is continuously cooperating in the investigation and he undertakes that he shall cooperate in the investigation, therefore, the direction may be issued to the effect that no coercive steps be taken against the petitioner in pursuance of the aforesaid F.I.R.

8. Learned AGA has submitted the instruction letter provided by the Circle Officer, Dalmau, District Raebareli, same is taken on record.

9. In the aforesaid instructions this fact has been indicated that the wife of the present petitioner has been arrested and she is in judicial custody. Section 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act has been added as the missing lady belongs to the scheduled caste community. In the aforesaid instruction letter it has been further indicated that whereabouts and location of the missing lady is still untraceable. The charge-sheet no. 173/2025 dated 19.6.2025 has been filed against the wife of the present petitioner and so far as the 3 CRLA No. 2344 of 2025 complicity of the present petitioner is concerned the investigation is still going on. In the aforesaid instruction letter it has not been indicated that the petitioner is not cooperating in the investigation, therefore, it may not be presumed that the petitioner is having any apprehension of arrest at this stage.

10. It is also expected that if the petitioner cooperates in the investigation properly, he may not be unnecessarily harassed but it is needless to say that if the charge-sheet is filed against the petitioner any appropriate step may be taken by the investigating agency strictly in accordance with law"

11. It is further stated that as the charge sheet has already been filed before the trial court therefore it would not be possible for the appellant to tamper the evidence of prosecution an also influence the witnesses of prosecution. 12 It is also stated that according to the charge sheet, before the trial, the prosecution intends to examine 13 witnesses, as such, the possibility of the conclusion of the trial in near future is bleak.

13. Thus, taking note of aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as also that the appellant is in jail since 24.04.2025 indulgence of this Court is required in the matter and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

14. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant, however, he could not dispute the aforesaid contentions made by the learned counsel for the appellant.

15. Considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A., and gone through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R and chances of conviction of the appellant in the instant case, this Court finds that the present appeal is liable to be allowed. Accordingly, it is allowed.

16. Upon due consideration of above facts and circumstances including the statement(s) of the victim and contents of the FIR 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.

17. The impugned order dated 07.07.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Raebareli in Bail Application No.1406 of 2025 arising out of Case 4 CRLA No. 2344 of 2025 Crime No.0139 of 2025, under Sections 140(1) Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (in short "B.N.S.") and Sections 3(2)(v) S.C/S.T Act, P.S.- Unchahar, District- Raebareli is hereby set aside.

18. Let appellant- Shahnaz @ Babli be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on her 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.

19. 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. . November 14, 2025 Preeti (Saurabh Lavania,J.) PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

3. 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 07.07.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Raebareli in Bail Application No.1406 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime No.0139 of 2025, under Sections 140(1) Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (in short "B.N.S.") and Sections 3(2)(v) S.C/S.T Act, P.S.- Unchahar, District- Raebareli.

4. For the purposes of seeking bail, it is submitted that the appellant is a lady aged about 45 years wife of co-accused Mohd. Jamal Anwar @ Jamal @ Afzal (indicated in the F.I.R as Jamal @ Afzal @ Mohd. Jamal Anwar) is languishing in jail since 24.04.2025 and taking note of the period of incarceration as also spirit of Section 482 BNSS akin to Section 437 Cr.P.C (now repealed), the appellant be released on bail.

5. It is further stated that the story of the prosecution is completely false and concocted and it would appear from a bare reason the F.I.R and relevant documents on records.

6. In continuation, it is stated that the a written report of missing of Shahsi the opposite party @ Guddu was submitted by no.2/informant, namely Dashrath Lal, R/O Village Bahanpur, P.S. Unchahar, the husband of 2 CRLA No. 2344 of 2025 District Raebareli. NCR was registered at P.S. Unchahar, District Raebareli on 18.03.2025.

7. It is further stated that after the delay of 36 days, the informant has lodged the F.I.R on 14.04.2025 at P.S. Unchahar, District Raebareli, registered as F.I.R No. 0139 of 2025 under Sections 140(1) B.N.S., akin to Section 364 I.P.C (now repealed), and Sections 3(2)(v) S.C/S.T Act, P.S.- Unchahar, District- Raebareli. It nutshell, it has been alleged in the F.I.R that the appellant and co-accused Afzal has sold the daughter aged about 22 years of the informant.

8. It is further submitted that statement(s) of independent witnesses, namely, Smt. Rita Devi w/o Dashrath Lal, Chedi LaL s/o Sundar and Usman s/o Khaliq would indicate that all the statements of the independent witnesses are in same tune.

9. It is further stated that infact it is a case of circumstantial evidence and there is no direct link available with the prosecution to connect with the present appellant with crime indicated in the F.I.R, if the case of prosecution is taken on its face value.

10. It is also stated that this Court has protected the interest of the co- accused Mohd. Jamal Afzal husband of the appellant vide order dated

02.09.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 7533 of 2025. The relevant portion of the order referred is reads as under :- "7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that he is continuously cooperating in the investigation and he undertakes that he shall cooperate in the investigation, therefore, the direction may be issued to the effect that no coercive steps be taken against the petitioner in pursuance of the aforesaid F.I.R.

8. Learned AGA has submitted the instruction letter provided by the Circle Officer, Dalmau, District Raebareli, same is taken on record.

9. In the aforesaid instructions this fact has been indicated that the wife of the present petitioner has been arrested and she is in judicial custody. Section 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act has been added as the missing lady belongs to the scheduled caste community. In the aforesaid instruction letter it has been further indicated that whereabouts and location of the missing lady is still untraceable. The charge-sheet no. 173/2025 dated 19.6.2025 has been filed against the wife of the present petitioner and so far as the 3 CRLA No. 2344 of 2025 complicity of the present petitioner is concerned the investigation is still going on. In the aforesaid instruction letter it has not been indicated that the petitioner is not cooperating in the investigation, therefore, it may not be presumed that the petitioner is having any apprehension of arrest at this stage.

10. It is also expected that if the petitioner cooperates in the investigation properly, he may not be unnecessarily harassed but it is needless to say that if the charge-sheet is filed against the petitioner any appropriate step may be taken by the investigating agency strictly in accordance with law"

11. It is further stated that as the charge sheet has already been filed before the trial court therefore it would not be possible for the appellant to tamper the evidence of prosecution an also influence the witnesses of prosecution. 12 It is also stated that according to the charge sheet, before the trial, the prosecution intends to examine 13 witnesses, as such, the possibility of the conclusion of the trial in near future is bleak.

13. Thus, taking note of aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as also that the appellant is in jail since 24.04.2025 indulgence of this Court is required in the matter and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

14. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant, however, he could not dispute the aforesaid contentions made by the learned counsel for the appellant.

15. Considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A., and gone through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R and chances of conviction of the appellant in the instant case, this Court finds that the present appeal is liable to be allowed. Accordingly, it is allowed.

16. Upon due consideration of above facts and circumstances including the statement(s) of the victim and contents of the FIR 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.

17. The impugned order dated 07.07.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Raebareli in Bail Application No.1406 of 2025 arising out of Case 4 CRLA No. 2344 of 2025 Crime No.0139 of 2025, under Sections 140(1) Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita (in short "B.N.S.") and Sections 3(2)(v) S.C/S.T Act, P.S.- Unchahar, District- Raebareli is hereby set aside.

18. Let appellant- Shahnaz @ Babli be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on her 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.

19. 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. . November 14, 2025 Preeti (Saurabh Lavania,J.) PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench