SAALIM AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

             HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

                    CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 10208 of 2025

Saalim And 2 Others
                                                                  .....Appellant(s)
                                       Versus
State of U.P. and Another
                                                                .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Appellant(s)           :     Anand Ji Mishra, Kaushal Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Respondent(s)          :     G.A., Rahul Singh Tomar

Court No. - 50
                  HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J.

1. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes &
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the
appellants to set aside the bail rejection order dated 23.09.2025 passed by
Special Judge (SC/ST Act) Meerut in Bail Application No.5297 of 2025
arising out of Case Crime No.266 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3),
109(1), 352, 115(2) BNS and 3(1)(gha), 3(1)(dha) and 3(2)(V) of SC/ST
Act, Police Station Bhawanpur, District Meerut.


2. Heard learned counsel for the appellants, the learned AGA for the State-
respondent no.1, learned counsel for the informant and perused the entire
record.

3. In short, according to the prosecution case, on 22.08.2025 at about 07.15
pm, the accused Anas alongwith co-accused Saalim, Ikramau and Farooq
and some unknown persons with the intention to kill have assaulted the
injured Adesh, Shivanshu, Anuj, Mohit, Gaurav as a result of which they
have sustained serious injuries. It is further alleged that the accused persons
have also abused to the informant as well as injured by caste related words.

4. Submission of learned counsel for the appellants is that the appellants are
innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. The appellants has
not committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR. Prosecution
story is totally false and fabricated. The impugned FIR has been lodged
against four accused persons including the appellants and against them only
general role assigned. No specific role assigned to the appellants. Further
submission is that that as to who was the author of the alleged incident, is
not clear. As per version of the FIR as well as statement of the injured, the
accused persons have assaulted with sharp edge weapon but as per injury
report, there is no injury of sharp edge weapon. Further submission is that
there are 18 prosecution witnesses and till now no witness has been
examined meaning thereby there is no possibility of early conclusion of trial
                                                          CRLA No. 10208 of 2025
                                 2

in near future, hence, the appellants may be enlarged on bail. Appellants are
languishing in jail since 23.08.2025 having no previous criminal antecedents
as mentioned in paragraph 24 of the affidavit. Further submission is that the
impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from
infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court.

5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the
informant vehemently opposed the the prayer for bail of the appellants.

6. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for
the parties and have gone through the entire record including the impugned
order carefully.

7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in
view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, role
assigned to the present appellants and the nature of injury, the Court is of the
opinion that the appellants have made out a case for bail. The Court below
erred in rejecting the bail application of the appellants. The impugned order
suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set-aside and
the appeal is liable to be allowed.

8. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the
bail application of the appellants is hereby set-aside.

9. Let the appellants-Saalim, Ikramu & Farooq, involved in aforesaid case
crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two
sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned
subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the
sureties be verified.

(i) The appellants will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

(ii) The appellants will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

(iii) The appellants will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless
personal presence is exempted.

(iv) The appellants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of
which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are
suspected.

(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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer
                                                                                            CRLA No. 10208 of 2025
                                                                    3

                                    or tamper with the evidence.

                                    10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be
                                    at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

                                    March 18, 2026
                                    Ajeet
                                                                                       (Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.)




Digitally signed by :-
AJEET KUMAR PATEL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad