Allahabad High Court
SHAHNAWAJversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- TEJ PRATAP TIWARI
Holding
The Court granted the appellant liberty to file a bail application within three weeks and stayed any coercive action, thereby disposing of the appeal.
Summary
The appellant, Shahnawaj, filed a criminal appeal under Section 14A(1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, seeking to set aside a cognizance order dated 06‑10‑2025. He did not contest the merits of the case but requested liberty to file a bail application before the Special Judge, invoking the Supreme Court’s decision in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI. The State’s Additional Government Advocate did not oppose the request. The High Court, applying the Supreme Court’s bail principles, granted the appellant permission to file a bail application within three weeks and ordered that no coercive action be taken against him during that period. The appeal was consequently disposed without adjudicating the substantive issues.
Issues considered
- What relief, if any, can be granted to an appellant under Section 14A(1) of the SC/ST Act pending a bail application?
- Whether the trial court should be directed to entertain a bail application and stay coercive action against the appellant.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 352
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14A(1), 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s)
Subjects
- bail
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
- Section 14A
- coercive action
- criminal appeal
- procedural relief
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 219 of 2026
Shahnawaj
.....Appellant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Appellant(s) : Aktar Ahmed Siddiqui
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Rooma Singh
Court No. - 92
HON'BLE TEJ PRATAP TIWARI, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, the learned A.G.A. for the
State of U.P. and perused the records.
2. The instant criminal appeal under Section 14A(1) of the Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 by the
appellant to set aside the impugned cognizance order dated 06.10.2025
passed by the Special Judge (S.C./S.T.) Prevention of Atrocities, Act,
Rampur and entire proceeding of Special Case No. 136 of 2025 (State vs.
Shahnawaj), under Section 352 B.N.S. and Section 3(1)(r)/(s) of S.C./S.T.
Act, arising out of Charge sheet No. 235 of 2025 dated 13.08.2025 and
Case crime No. 226 of 2025, under Section 352 B.N.S. and Section
3(1)(r)/(s) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Civil Lines, District Rampur.
3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits that he
does not wish to press the appeal on merits; rather, he seeks liberty to file
an appropriate application before the concerned trial court and a direction
to the learned trial court to decide the bail application of the appellant in
light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar
Antil vs. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51.
4. Learned A.G.A. for the State does not oppose the submissions made by
learned counsel for the appellant.
5. In light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court regarding
the grant of bail to an accused, the appellant is granted liberty to file a bail
application before the concerned trial court within three weeks from
today, along with a certified copy of this order. If such an application is
CRLA No. 219 of 2026
2
filed within the said period, the concerned trial court shall pass an order
on the same in accordance with law. For a period of three weeks, or till
the filing of the bail application, whichever is earlier, no coercive action
shall be taken against the appellant in the aforesaid case.
6. With the aforesaid observations, the present criminal appeal is
disposed of.
(Tej Pratap Tiwari,J.)
May 7, 2026
Manoj
Digitally signed by :-
MANOJ KUMAR YADAV
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…