Lal Bahadur vs Others

2. As per Office report dated 21.11.2025, the service of notice upon opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 is sufficient. Today, when the case called out, no one appeared on behalf of opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 to oppose the present bail appeal. In this background of the case, this Court proceeded to decide the appeal on merits.

3. Heard.

4. 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 13.10.2025 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lakhimpur Kheri in Bail Application No. 413 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 275 of 2025 under Sections 109(1), 351(3), 352 BNS and Sections 3(1)Da, 3(1)Dha, 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act, P.S.-Khamariya, District-Kheri.

5. 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.

6. It is also stated that co-accused namely Ajay Kumar has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 08.09.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 2302 of 2025. Relevant portion of the order dated 08.09.2025 reads as under:- "1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 and perused the record. 2 CRLA No. 3571 of 2025

2. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 against the order dated 17.07.2025 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lakhimpur Kheri in Bail Application No.273 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No.275 of 2025, under Sections 109 (1), 351(3), 352 of BNS, 2023 and Section 3(1)(da), 3 (1) (dha), 3(2)(V) of of SC/ST Act, P.S.- Khamariya, District - Lakhimpur Kheri.

3. While pressing the instant appeal, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the appellant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that an F.I.R. No. 0238/2025, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2) B.N.S. was lodged by one Smt. Ram Guni W/o Suresh Kumar on 30.05.2025 at Police Station-Khamariya, District Lakhimpur Kheri. This F.I.R. was lodged against Dilip Kumar S/o Indrapal and one unknown person and as per the same the incident was occurred on 30.05.2025.

5. It stated that after the aforesaid F.I.R., the opposite party No.2 Smt. Lochani Ambedkar, W/o Dilip Kumar Bhargava (the accused in the F.I.R. 0238/2025) lodged the F.I.R. making allegations therein to attract the offence under Sections Sections 109 (1), 351(3), 352 of BNS, 2023 and Section 3(1)(da), 3 (1) (dha), 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act against the 04 persons including the applicant namely Santosh Nishad, Aacheylal, Ajay Kumar (present appellant) and Lal Bahadur.

6. It is stated that a perusal of the F.I.R. in relation to which the appellant, having no criminal history and the same has not been disputed, and is in jail since 11.07.2025, would show that an altercation on 15.06.2025 took place without predetermination of mind on spur of moment and as such offence under Section 109(1) of B.N.S., akin to Section 307 I.P.C., would not attract and Section 115(2) of BNS, akin to Section 325 I.P.C., would be attracted if at all.

7. It is further submitted that as to who caused the injury to attract the offence under Section 115(2) of BNS is subject matter of trial as the general allegations have been leveled against all the accused persons. In these circumstances, the appellant, who has no criminal history and is languishing in jail since 11.07.2025 is entitled to be released on bail and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

8. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant, however, they could not dispute the above contentions made by the appellant' counsel.

9. 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. 3 CRLA No. 3571 of 2025

10. Upon due consideration of above facts and circumstances and 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.

11. Order dated 17.07.2025, passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lakhimpur Kheri in Bail Application No.273 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No.0275 of 2025, under Sections 109 (1), 351(3), 352 of BNS, 2023 and Section 3(1)(da), 3 (1) (dha), 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, P.S.- Khamariya, District - Lakhimpur Kheri is hereby set aside."

7. Thus, taking note of aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as also that the appellant is in incarceration since 08.10.2025, 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.

8. 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 that co-accused has already been enlarged on bail by this Court.

9. 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., injury report(s) as well as other relevant documents including the statement(s) recorded by the Investigating Officer during investigation and the fact that co-accused has already been enlarged on bail by this Court.

10. 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.

11. The impugned order dated 13.10.2025 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lakhimpur Kheri in Bail Application No. 413 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 275 of 2025 under Sections 109(1), 351(3), 352 BNS and Sections 3(1)Da, 3(1)Dha, 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act, P.S.-Khamariya, District-Kheri, is hereby set aside.

12. Let appellant-Lal Bahadur be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two sureties, out of which one shall be the family member of the accused-appellant, each in 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. 4 CRLA No. 3571 of 2025 (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.

13. 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 24, 2025 Vinay/- (Saurabh Lavania,J.) VINAY KUMAR VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench

2. As per Office report dated 21.11.2025, the service of notice upon opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 is sufficient. Today, when the case called out, no one appeared on behalf of opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 to oppose the present bail appeal. In this background of the case, this Court proceeded to decide the appeal on merits.

3. Heard.

4. 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 13.10.2025 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lakhimpur Kheri in Bail Application No. 413 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 275 of 2025 under Sections 109(1), 351(3), 352 BNS and Sections 3(1)Da, 3(1)Dha, 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act, P.S.-Khamariya, District-Kheri.

5. 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.

6. It is also stated that co-accused namely Ajay Kumar has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 08.09.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 2302 of 2025. Relevant portion of the order dated 08.09.2025 reads as under:- "1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 and perused the record. 2 CRLA No. 3571 of 2025

2. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 against the order dated 17.07.2025 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lakhimpur Kheri in Bail Application No.273 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No.275 of 2025, under Sections 109 (1), 351(3), 352 of BNS, 2023 and Section 3(1)(da), 3 (1) (dha), 3(2)(V) of of SC/ST Act, P.S.- Khamariya, District - Lakhimpur Kheri.

3. While pressing the instant appeal, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the appellant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that an F.I.R. No. 0238/2025, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2) B.N.S. was lodged by one Smt. Ram Guni W/o Suresh Kumar on 30.05.2025 at Police Station-Khamariya, District Lakhimpur Kheri. This F.I.R. was lodged against Dilip Kumar S/o Indrapal and one unknown person and as per the same the incident was occurred on 30.05.2025.

5. It stated that after the aforesaid F.I.R., the opposite party No.2 Smt. Lochani Ambedkar, W/o Dilip Kumar Bhargava (the accused in the F.I.R. 0238/2025) lodged the F.I.R. making allegations therein to attract the offence under Sections Sections 109 (1), 351(3), 352 of BNS, 2023 and Section 3(1)(da), 3 (1) (dha), 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act against the 04 persons including the applicant namely Santosh Nishad, Aacheylal, Ajay Kumar (present appellant) and Lal Bahadur.

6. It is stated that a perusal of the F.I.R. in relation to which the appellant, having no criminal history and the same has not been disputed, and is in jail since 11.07.2025, would show that an altercation on 15.06.2025 took place without predetermination of mind on spur of moment and as such offence under Section 109(1) of B.N.S., akin to Section 307 I.P.C., would not attract and Section 115(2) of BNS, akin to Section 325 I.P.C., would be attracted if at all.

7. It is further submitted that as to who caused the injury to attract the offence under Section 115(2) of BNS is subject matter of trial as the general allegations have been leveled against all the accused persons. In these circumstances, the appellant, who has no criminal history and is languishing in jail since 11.07.2025 is entitled to be released on bail and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

8. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant, however, they could not dispute the above contentions made by the appellant' counsel.

9. 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. 3 CRLA No. 3571 of 2025

10. Upon due consideration of above facts and circumstances and 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.

11. Order dated 17.07.2025, passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lakhimpur Kheri in Bail Application No.273 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No.0275 of 2025, under Sections 109 (1), 351(3), 352 of BNS, 2023 and Section 3(1)(da), 3 (1) (dha), 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, P.S.- Khamariya, District - Lakhimpur Kheri is hereby set aside."

7. Thus, taking note of aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as also that the appellant is in incarceration since 08.10.2025, 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.

8. 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 that co-accused has already been enlarged on bail by this Court.

9. 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., injury report(s) as well as other relevant documents including the statement(s) recorded by the Investigating Officer during investigation and the fact that co-accused has already been enlarged on bail by this Court.

10. 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.

11. The impugned order dated 13.10.2025 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lakhimpur Kheri in Bail Application No. 413 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 275 of 2025 under Sections 109(1), 351(3), 352 BNS and Sections 3(1)Da, 3(1)Dha, 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act, P.S.-Khamariya, District-Kheri, is hereby set aside.

12. Let appellant-Lal Bahadur be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two sureties, out of which one shall be the family member of the accused-appellant, each in 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. 4 CRLA No. 3571 of 2025 (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.

13. 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 24, 2025 Vinay/- (Saurabh Lavania,J.) VINAY KUMAR VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench