Paras Saroj And Another vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko.

1. Case called out. No one appeared on behalf of the private opposite party No. 2/complainant despite service of notice, as appears from Annexure No. CA-9 to the counter affidavit of State. Learned AGA is present in the Court. In these circumstances and also taking note of the order of this Court dated 29.08.2025, which says "It is made clear that on the next date of listing, the case would not be adjourned in the absence of the learned counsel for the private opposite party and appropriate orders would be passed in the case in first call even in the absence of counsel for the private opposite party", the Court proceeded to hear the instant bail appeal on merits.

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

3. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 against the order dated 22.07.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Pratapgarh in second Bail Application No. 2556/2025 arising out of Case Crime No. 58 of 2022, under Sections- 147, 148, 323, 325, 304, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S.- Kandhai, District- Pratapgarh.

4. 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.

5. Further stated that co-accused persons namely Ram Surat and Rakesh @ Pappu Kahar, similarly situated, have already been enlarged on bail by this Court in terms of orders dated 29.08.2024 and 24.10.2024 passed in CRIMINAL APPEAL Nos. 2286 of 2022 and 1107 of 2024. Relevant portion of the order dated 24.10.2024 passed in the case of co- accused/Rakesh @ Pappu Kahar is extracted here-in-under:- "5. This is second criminal appeal seeking bail. The first criminal appeal i.e. Criminal Appeal No. 2156 of 2022 preferred by the appellant with a prayer to enlarging him on bail has been dismissed by this Court vide order dated 18.08.2023.

6. While pressing the instant appeal, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant having no criminal history is languishing in jail since 19.02.2022 and despite the observations made by this Court in 2 CRLA No. 2313 of 2025 the order dated 18.08.2023 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 2156 of 2022, the trial has not been concluded till date nor the same was proceeded in terms of Section 309 Cr.P.C. nor is proceeding in terms of Section 346 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (in short "BNSS").

7. It is further stated that a perusal of story of prosecution as indicated in the FIR in issue i.e. FIR No. 0058/2022 lodged by the opposite party No. 2 making allegations therein so as to attract the offences as indicated under Sections- 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 452, 308 I.P.C. and Sections 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha), (3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act, P.S.- Kandhai, District- Pratapgarh, would indicate that the case of the prosecution against the appellant would ultimately fall under Section 304 Part II IPC, as per which, the punishment can be awarded upto 10 years or with fine or with both.

8. It is stated that the appellant is already in judicial custody since 19.02.2022. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 21.02.2024 is liable to be set-aside and the appellant is entitled to be released on bail.

9. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant, however, he could not dispute the above contentions made by the appellant's counsel.

10. 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., as well as other relevant documents.

11. Upon due consideration of above facts and circumstances including the story setup in the FIR and the period of incarceration of appelalnt and 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.

12. Order dated 21.02.2024 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Pratapgarh in second Bail Application No. 2694/2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 58 of 2022, under Sections- 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 452, 304, 325 I.P.C. and Sections 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha), (3(2)(V), 3(2)(V-A) of SC/ST Act, P.S.- Kandhai, District- Pratapgarh is hereby set aside.

13. Let the appellant Rakesh @ Pappu Kahar 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 :-"

6. In these circumstances, the appellant, who is having no criminal history, which has not been opposed by learned AGA, and languishing in jail since 25.06.2025, is also entitled for bail and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

7. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant, however, he could not dispute the fact that the co-accused persons namely Ram Surat and Rakesh @ Pappu Kahar have already been enlarged on bail by this Court.

8. 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 persons namely Ram Surat and Rakesh @ Pappu Kahar have already been enlarged on bail by this Court as well as other relevant documents including the statement(s) recorded by the Investigating Officer during investigation.

9. 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 3 CRLA No. 2313 of 2025 future, this Court is of the view that the appeal has substance and it is accordingly, allowed.

10. The order dated 22.07.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Pratapgarh in second Bail Application No. 2556/2025 arising out of Case Crime No. 58 of 2022, under Sections- 147, 148, 323, 325, 304, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S.- Kandhai, District- Pratapgarh, is hereby set aside.

11. Let the appellants- Paras Saroj and Samkalli @ Shyamkalli 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.

12. 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. September 18, 2025 Arun/- (Saurabh Lavania,J.) ARUN KUMAR GANGWAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1. Case called out. No one appeared on behalf of the private opposite party No. 2/complainant despite service of notice, as appears from Annexure No. CA-9 to the counter affidavit of State. Learned AGA is present in the Court. In these circumstances and also taking note of the order of this Court dated 29.08.2025, which says "It is made clear that on the next date of listing, the case would not be adjourned in the absence of the learned counsel for the private opposite party and appropriate orders would be passed in the case in first call even in the absence of counsel for the private opposite party", the Court proceeded to hear the instant bail appeal on merits.

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

3. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 against the order dated 22.07.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Pratapgarh in second Bail Application No. 2556/2025 arising out of Case Crime No. 58 of 2022, under Sections- 147, 148, 323, 325, 304, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S.- Kandhai, District- Pratapgarh.

4. 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.

5. Further stated that co-accused persons namely Ram Surat and Rakesh @ Pappu Kahar, similarly situated, have already been enlarged on bail by this Court in terms of orders dated 29.08.2024 and 24.10.2024 passed in CRIMINAL APPEAL Nos. 2286 of 2022 and 1107 of 2024. Relevant portion of the order dated 24.10.2024 passed in the case of co- accused/Rakesh @ Pappu Kahar is extracted here-in-under:- "5. This is second criminal appeal seeking bail. The first criminal appeal i.e. Criminal Appeal No. 2156 of 2022 preferred by the appellant with a prayer to enlarging him on bail has been dismissed by this Court vide order dated 18.08.2023.

6. While pressing the instant appeal, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant having no criminal history is languishing in jail since 19.02.2022 and despite the observations made by this Court in 2 CRLA No. 2313 of 2025 the order dated 18.08.2023 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 2156 of 2022, the trial has not been concluded till date nor the same was proceeded in terms of Section 309 Cr.P.C. nor is proceeding in terms of Section 346 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (in short "BNSS").

7. It is further stated that a perusal of story of prosecution as indicated in the FIR in issue i.e. FIR No. 0058/2022 lodged by the opposite party No. 2 making allegations therein so as to attract the offences as indicated under Sections- 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 452, 308 I.P.C. and Sections 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha), (3(2)(va) of SC/ST Act, P.S.- Kandhai, District- Pratapgarh, would indicate that the case of the prosecution against the appellant would ultimately fall under Section 304 Part II IPC, as per which, the punishment can be awarded upto 10 years or with fine or with both.

8. It is stated that the appellant is already in judicial custody since 19.02.2022. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 21.02.2024 is liable to be set-aside and the appellant is entitled to be released on bail.

9. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant, however, he could not dispute the above contentions made by the appellant's counsel.

10. 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., as well as other relevant documents.

11. Upon due consideration of above facts and circumstances including the story setup in the FIR and the period of incarceration of appelalnt and 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.

12. Order dated 21.02.2024 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Pratapgarh in second Bail Application No. 2694/2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 58 of 2022, under Sections- 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 452, 304, 325 I.P.C. and Sections 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha), (3(2)(V), 3(2)(V-A) of SC/ST Act, P.S.- Kandhai, District- Pratapgarh is hereby set aside.

13. Let the appellant Rakesh @ Pappu Kahar 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 :-"

6. In these circumstances, the appellant, who is having no criminal history, which has not been opposed by learned AGA, and languishing in jail since 25.06.2025, is also entitled for bail and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

7. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant, however, he could not dispute the fact that the co-accused persons namely Ram Surat and Rakesh @ Pappu Kahar have already been enlarged on bail by this Court.

8. 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 persons namely Ram Surat and Rakesh @ Pappu Kahar have already been enlarged on bail by this Court as well as other relevant documents including the statement(s) recorded by the Investigating Officer during investigation.

9. 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 3 CRLA No. 2313 of 2025 future, this Court is of the view that the appeal has substance and it is accordingly, allowed.

10. The order dated 22.07.2025 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Pratapgarh in second Bail Application No. 2556/2025 arising out of Case Crime No. 58 of 2022, under Sections- 147, 148, 323, 325, 304, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S.- Kandhai, District- Pratapgarh, is hereby set aside.

11. Let the appellants- Paras Saroj and Samkalli @ Shyamkalli 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.

12. 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. September 18, 2025 Arun/- (Saurabh Lavania,J.) ARUN KUMAR GANGWAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench