Allahabad High Court

PRADEEPversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 18 March 2026
Bench: SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV

Holding

The appeal is allowed and the order rejecting bail is set aside, granting bail to the appellant with conditions.

Summary

The appellant Pradeep appealed against a bail rejection order dated 12‑01‑2026 passed by the Special Judge under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. He claimed innocence and argued that a co‑accused, Kuldeep, had been granted bail in a similar case, invoking parity. The State opposed bail but did not refute the appellant’s submissions. The High Court examined the nature of the offences (Sections 115(2), 352, 110 of the B.N.S. and Sections 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha) of the SC/ST Act), the evidence and the appellant’s role, and concluded that bail was warranted. Consequently, the court set aside the bail rejection, ordered the appellant’s release on personal bond with two sureties and imposed standard bail conditions, reserving the right to cancel bail on breach.

Issues considered

Whether the appellant is entitled to bail despite the seriousness of offences under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
Whether parity with a co‑accused who was granted bail mandates granting bail to the appellant.
Whether the appellant’s alleged role and the evidence presented justify the grant of bail.

Legislation cited

B.N.S. — s. 110, 115(2), 352
Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 14-A(2), 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha)

Subjects

bail
SC/ST Act
parity
criminal appeal
scheduled castes
scheduled tribes
bail conditions
prevention of atrocities

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 718 of 2026

Pradeep
.....Appellant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Appellant(s) : Sudhanshu Kumar Singh
Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A.

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

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State as well as
perused the record.

2. The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant - Pradeep to set
aside the bail rejection order dated 12.1.2026 passed by Special Judge SC/ST Act,
Muzaffarnagar in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.120 of 2026 (Pradeep Vs. State
of U.P.) arising out of Case Crime No.95 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 352, 110 of
B.N.S. and Section 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha) of SC/ST (P.A.) Act, P.S.- Kotwali Nagar,
District- Muzaffarnagar with a further prayer to enlarge the appellant on bail in the
aforesaid case.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is innocent and
has been falsely implicated in the present case. The appellant is in jail since 6.1.2026.

4. It is further contended that similarly placed co-accused person, namely, Kuldeep,
has already been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated
30.8.2025 in Criminal Appeal No.5462 of 2025, therefore, the applicant is also
entitled for bail on the ground of parity.

5. I have perused the bail order of the co-accused and find that the role assigned to the
present appellant is almost similar to that of co-accused person, who has already been
granted bail by this Court.

6. On the other hand, learned AGA has opposed the application for bail but could not
dispute the submission raised by learned counsel for the appellant.

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
appellant, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail.
CRLA No. 718 of 2026
2

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

9. Let the appellant- Pradeep, 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 appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii) The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal
presence is exempted.
(iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is
accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.
(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.

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 19, 2026
Krishna*/Ajeet
(Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.)

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

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…