Ram Sagar Verma vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of

HON'BLE PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J. Counter affidavit filed today by learned AGA for the State is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned AGA for the State as well as perused the record. Vide order dated 17.09.2025, the notice has been issued to opposite party no. 2 and as per office report dated 27.10.2025, the same has been served upon opposite party no. 2 personally. Today when the case is taken up, neither counsel on behalf of opposite party no. 2 is present nor any counter on his behalf has been filed, therefore, this Court has no option but to proceed in the matter to decide the instant appeal. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 has been preferred against the impugned order dated 27.08.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Ambedkar Nagar in Bail Application No. 1853 of 2025, in Case Crime No. 583 of 2025, under Sections 318(2), 318(4), 352, 351(3), 3(5) of BNS, 2023 and Sections 3(2)Va, 3(1) Da, Dha of the SC/ST Act, Police Station Kotwali Akbarpur, District Ambedkar Nagar, whereby the bail application of the appellant has been rejected. 2 CRLA No. 3015 of 2025 Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has falsely been implicated in the present case. He submits that the appellant is a brick kiln proprietor and his employee, who is also a maternal uncle of the victim, had misappropriated the amount Rs.5,00,000/-, belonging to the appellant, and on demand of the said amount, the instant FIR has been lodged by the victim with collusion of her uncle. There is no cogent piece of evidence against the appellant. He next submits that the statements recorded by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation, are contradictory, thereby causing doubt on the truthfulness of the prosecution story. He further submits that the appellant has four cases criminal history which has been explained. He next submits that the appellant is languishing in jail since 06.08.2025 and in case the he is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and he shall fully cooperate with the trial. He has further submitted that there is no possibility of the appellant to intimidate or pressurize the witnesses or any other persons acquainted with the facts of the present case. For the aforesaid reasons, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the instant criminal appeal deserves to be allowed and the impugned order may be set aside and consequently, the appellant deserves to be enlarged on bail. Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the contentions aforesaid, however he has been unable to dispute the other factual submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of material available on record, including the allegations made in the FIR, it transpires that there was some dispute with regard to money transaction between the appellant and maternal uncle of the victim and the FIR is lodged by the victim with collusion of her uncle; there is no cogent piece of evidence against the appellant; there are contradictions in the statements of the witnesses, which causing doubt on the truthfulness of the prosecution story; the appellant has four cases criminal history which has been explained and the appellant is languishing in jail since 06.08.2025 and he has undertaken that in case he is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse 3 CRLA No. 3015 of 2025 the liberty of bail and will cooperate with the trial. Without expressing any opinion on merit, this Court is of the view that the learned court below has failed to appreciate the material available on record, thus, the order passed by the court below is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. Consequently, the impugned order dated 27.08.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Ambedkar Nagar in Bail Application No. 1853 of 2025, in Case Crime No. 583 of 2025, under Sections 318(2), 318(4), 352, 351(3), 3(5) of BNS, 2023 and Sections 3(2) Va, 3(1) Da, Dha of the SC/ST Act, Police Station Kotwali Akbarpur, District Ambedkar Nagar, is hereby set aside. Let the appellant-Ram Sagar Verma be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties relating to his family members to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to following additional conditions- (i) The appellant shall cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial (iii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(s). (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 shall 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.PC. 4 CRLA No. 3015 of 2025 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 appellant 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 27, 2025 kkv/ (Pramod Kumar Srivastava,J.) KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

HON'BLE PRAMOD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J. Counter affidavit filed today by learned AGA for the State is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned AGA for the State as well as perused the record. Vide order dated 17.09.2025, the notice has been issued to opposite party no. 2 and as per office report dated 27.10.2025, the same has been served upon opposite party no. 2 personally. Today when the case is taken up, neither counsel on behalf of opposite party no. 2 is present nor any counter on his behalf has been filed, therefore, this Court has no option but to proceed in the matter to decide the instant appeal. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 has been preferred against the impugned order dated 27.08.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Ambedkar Nagar in Bail Application No. 1853 of 2025, in Case Crime No. 583 of 2025, under Sections 318(2), 318(4), 352, 351(3), 3(5) of BNS, 2023 and Sections 3(2)Va, 3(1) Da, Dha of the SC/ST Act, Police Station Kotwali Akbarpur, District Ambedkar Nagar, whereby the bail application of the appellant has been rejected. 2 CRLA No. 3015 of 2025 Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has falsely been implicated in the present case. He submits that the appellant is a brick kiln proprietor and his employee, who is also a maternal uncle of the victim, had misappropriated the amount Rs.5,00,000/-, belonging to the appellant, and on demand of the said amount, the instant FIR has been lodged by the victim with collusion of her uncle. There is no cogent piece of evidence against the appellant. He next submits that the statements recorded by the Investigating Officer during the course of investigation, are contradictory, thereby causing doubt on the truthfulness of the prosecution story. He further submits that the appellant has four cases criminal history which has been explained. He next submits that the appellant is languishing in jail since 06.08.2025 and in case the he is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and he shall fully cooperate with the trial. He has further submitted that there is no possibility of the appellant to intimidate or pressurize the witnesses or any other persons acquainted with the facts of the present case. For the aforesaid reasons, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the instant criminal appeal deserves to be allowed and the impugned order may be set aside and consequently, the appellant deserves to be enlarged on bail. Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the contentions aforesaid, however he has been unable to dispute the other factual submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of material available on record, including the allegations made in the FIR, it transpires that there was some dispute with regard to money transaction between the appellant and maternal uncle of the victim and the FIR is lodged by the victim with collusion of her uncle; there is no cogent piece of evidence against the appellant; there are contradictions in the statements of the witnesses, which causing doubt on the truthfulness of the prosecution story; the appellant has four cases criminal history which has been explained and the appellant is languishing in jail since 06.08.2025 and he has undertaken that in case he is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse 3 CRLA No. 3015 of 2025 the liberty of bail and will cooperate with the trial. Without expressing any opinion on merit, this Court is of the view that the learned court below has failed to appreciate the material available on record, thus, the order passed by the court below is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. Consequently, the impugned order dated 27.08.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Ambedkar Nagar in Bail Application No. 1853 of 2025, in Case Crime No. 583 of 2025, under Sections 318(2), 318(4), 352, 351(3), 3(5) of BNS, 2023 and Sections 3(2) Va, 3(1) Da, Dha of the SC/ST Act, Police Station Kotwali Akbarpur, District Ambedkar Nagar, is hereby set aside. Let the appellant-Ram Sagar Verma be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties relating to his family members to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to following additional conditions- (i) The appellant shall cooperate with the prosecution during trial. (ii) The appellant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial (iii) The appellant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(s). (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 shall 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.PC. 4 CRLA No. 3015 of 2025 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 appellant 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 27, 2025 kkv/ (Pramod Kumar Srivastava,J.) KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench