Pramod Yadav and others v. State of U.P.), arising out of Case Crime No

HON'BLE PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and the learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party No. 1 and perused the entire record.

2. Learned AG.A. has filed counter affidavit today in Court, the same is taken on record.

3. As per the office report dated 25.09.2025 notice has already been served upon the opposite party Nos. 2, 3 and 4 but till date neither any counsel has appeared on behalf of opposite party Nos. 2, 3 and4 nor counter affidavit has been filed on their behalf, it appears that they are not interested to file any counter affidavit.

4. In the above circumstances, as the matter pertains to bail this Court has no option but to proceed for final arguments to decide the present appeal.

5. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred against the impugned order dated 08.08.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC & ST Act), District Barabanki in Bail Application No. 2579 of 2025 (Pramod Yadav and others Vs. State of U.P.), arising out of Case Crime No. 252/2025, under Sections 3(5), 352, 118(1), 115(2), 351(3), 109(1) of B.N.S. and Section 3(1) (Da), 3(1) (Dha), 3 (2) (v) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Jaidpur, District Barabanki, whereby the bail application of the appellants has been rejected.

6. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants have 2 CRLA No. 2696 of 2025 falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that in the F.I.R. general role has been assigned to all the accused persons. No specific role is attributed that who had assaulted with "banka", whereas the injury of incised would was found on the body of the injured Sanjay and as per medical report, all the injuries are simple in nature. He further submits that other injured persons, who claimed to be injured, in their injury report, no injury is found. He further submits that the injured Sanjay in his statement has not attributed any specific role to the appellants.

7. Learned counsel the appellants further submits accused/appellants are languishing in jail since 01.08.2025, who have no previous criminal history,and in case the appellants are enlarged on bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and they shall also fully cooperate with the trial. He has further submitted that there is no possibility of the appellants to intimidate or pressurize the witnesses or any other persons acquainted with the facts of the present case.

8. For the aforesaid reasons, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the instant criminal appeal deserves to be allowed and the order dated

08.08.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC & ST Act), District Barabanki in Bail Application No. 2579 of 2025 (Pramod Yada and others Vs. State of U.P.), arising out of Case Crime No. 252/2025, under Sections 3(5), 352, 118(1), 115(2), 351(3), 109(1) of B.N.S. and Section 3(1) (Da), 3(1) (Dha), 3 (2) (v) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Jaidpur, District Barabanki deserves to be set aside and consequently, the appellants deserve to be enlarged on bail during pendency of the trial.

9. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer by submitting that there is active participation of accused/appellants in the crime. Therefore, the accused/ appellants are not entitled to be enlarged on bail and the instant criminal appeal deserves to be dismissed. However, he has been unable to dispute the other factual submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the accused/appellant.

10. Upon consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and material available on record, submissions of counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. and considering the facts and circumstance of the case and the fact that general role has been assigned to all the accused persons. No 3 CRLA No. 2696 of 2025 specific role is attributed that who had assaulted with "banka", even the the injured Sanjay in his statement has not attributed any specific role to the appellants as well as the fact that the appellant is in jail since

01.08.2025, without having any criminal history and chances of conviction of the appellants in the instant case, without expressing any opinion on merit, this Court of the view that the learned court below has failed to appreciate the material available on record. The order passed by the court below is liable to be set aside.

11. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. Consequently, the impugned order dated 08.08.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC & ST Act), District Barabanki in Bail Application No. 2579 of 2025 (Pramod Yadav and others Vs. State of U.P.), arising out of Case Crime No. 252/2025, under Sections 3(5), 352, 118(1), 115(2), 351(3), 109(1) of B.N.S. and Section 3(1) (Da), 3(1) (Dha), 3 (2) (v) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Jaidpur, District Barabanki is hereby set aside.

12. Let the appellants- Pramod Yadav and Nand Lal be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on their furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) and two reliable sureties relating to their family members to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions- (1) The appellants shall cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellants shall not tamper with the evidence during (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. 4 CRLA No. 2696 of 2025 (viii) The appellants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.PC.

13. 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

14. 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. October 13, 2025 Arvind (Pramod Kumar Srivastava,J.) ARVIND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

HON'BLE PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and the learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party No. 1 and perused the entire record.

2. Learned AG.A. has filed counter affidavit today in Court, the same is taken on record.

3. As per the office report dated 25.09.2025 notice has already been served upon the opposite party Nos. 2, 3 and 4 but till date neither any counsel has appeared on behalf of opposite party Nos. 2, 3 and4 nor counter affidavit has been filed on their behalf, it appears that they are not interested to file any counter affidavit.

4. In the above circumstances, as the matter pertains to bail this Court has no option but to proceed for final arguments to decide the present appeal.

5. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred against the impugned order dated 08.08.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC & ST Act), District Barabanki in Bail Application No. 2579 of 2025 (Pramod Yadav and others Vs. State of U.P.), arising out of Case Crime No. 252/2025, under Sections 3(5), 352, 118(1), 115(2), 351(3), 109(1) of B.N.S. and Section 3(1) (Da), 3(1) (Dha), 3 (2) (v) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Jaidpur, District Barabanki, whereby the bail application of the appellants has been rejected.

6. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants have 2 CRLA No. 2696 of 2025 falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that in the F.I.R. general role has been assigned to all the accused persons. No specific role is attributed that who had assaulted with "banka", whereas the injury of incised would was found on the body of the injured Sanjay and as per medical report, all the injuries are simple in nature. He further submits that other injured persons, who claimed to be injured, in their injury report, no injury is found. He further submits that the injured Sanjay in his statement has not attributed any specific role to the appellants.

7. Learned counsel the appellants further submits accused/appellants are languishing in jail since 01.08.2025, who have no previous criminal history,and in case the appellants are enlarged on bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and they shall also fully cooperate with the trial. He has further submitted that there is no possibility of the appellants to intimidate or pressurize the witnesses or any other persons acquainted with the facts of the present case.

8. For the aforesaid reasons, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the instant criminal appeal deserves to be allowed and the order dated

08.08.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC & ST Act), District Barabanki in Bail Application No. 2579 of 2025 (Pramod Yada and others Vs. State of U.P.), arising out of Case Crime No. 252/2025, under Sections 3(5), 352, 118(1), 115(2), 351(3), 109(1) of B.N.S. and Section 3(1) (Da), 3(1) (Dha), 3 (2) (v) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Jaidpur, District Barabanki deserves to be set aside and consequently, the appellants deserve to be enlarged on bail during pendency of the trial.

9. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer by submitting that there is active participation of accused/appellants in the crime. Therefore, the accused/ appellants are not entitled to be enlarged on bail and the instant criminal appeal deserves to be dismissed. However, he has been unable to dispute the other factual submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the accused/appellant.

10. Upon consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and material available on record, submissions of counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. and considering the facts and circumstance of the case and the fact that general role has been assigned to all the accused persons. No 3 CRLA No. 2696 of 2025 specific role is attributed that who had assaulted with "banka", even the the injured Sanjay in his statement has not attributed any specific role to the appellants as well as the fact that the appellant is in jail since

01.08.2025, without having any criminal history and chances of conviction of the appellants in the instant case, without expressing any opinion on merit, this Court of the view that the learned court below has failed to appreciate the material available on record. The order passed by the court below is liable to be set aside.

11. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. Consequently, the impugned order dated 08.08.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC & ST Act), District Barabanki in Bail Application No. 2579 of 2025 (Pramod Yadav and others Vs. State of U.P.), arising out of Case Crime No. 252/2025, under Sections 3(5), 352, 118(1), 115(2), 351(3), 109(1) of B.N.S. and Section 3(1) (Da), 3(1) (Dha), 3 (2) (v) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Jaidpur, District Barabanki is hereby set aside.

12. Let the appellants- Pramod Yadav and Nand Lal be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on their furnishing personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only) and two reliable sureties relating to their family members to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions- (1) The appellants shall cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellants shall not tamper with the evidence during (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. 4 CRLA No. 2696 of 2025 (viii) The appellants shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.PC.

13. 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

14. 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. October 13, 2025 Arvind (Pramod Kumar Srivastava,J.) ARVIND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench