Ashok vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:134100

Court No. - 83

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1524 of 2025

Appellant :- Ashok Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Jitendra Kumar,Rajeev Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today, taken on record. In this case notice has already been served upon the informant.

¶7

The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant- Ashok to set aside the order dated 16.01.2025 in Bail Application No. 37 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime no. 267 of 2024, under sections 64, 333, 352, 351(2) B.N.S. and section 3(2)5 S.C./S.T. (P.A.) Act, Police Station Musajhag, District Budaun.

¶8

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

¶9

According to the prosecution case, the alleged incident took place on 01.11.2024 at 23.00 hours but FIR has been lodged on 10.11.2024 which is delayed by 09 days and there is no explanation of delay. The FIR has been lodged by the victim herself where no allegation of rape was levelled against the appellant but subsequently she has made allegation of rape against the appellant in her statement given under section 183 B.N.S.S. on 19.12.2024. The age of the victim is about 40 years and also medical does not support the prosecution story. As per the medical examination report no external or internal injury was found on the body of the victim.

¶10

Submission of the appellant is that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The appellant has not committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR. Further submission is that the prosecution story is totally false and

¶11

fabricated. The victim is lady aged about 40 years and she has daughter aged about 14 years, the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The victim is aged about. No any medical report is supported the prosecution story. Essential ingredients to constitute the offence under the SC/ST Act are lacking in the matter. Appellant is languishing in jail since 02.01.2025 and having no criminal history. Further submission is that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court.

¶12

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 opposing the prayer for bail had have submitted that the appellant committed the present offence having knowledge that the victim belonged to S.C./S.T. Community. There is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order.

¶13

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.

¶14

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 and the nature of injury, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The Court below erred in rejecting the bail application of the appellant. 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.

¶15

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

¶16

Let the appellant- Ashok 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.

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

(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.

¶21

(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.

¶22

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

¶23

Order Date :- 7.8.2025 RPD

¶24

Digitally signed by :- RATAN PRAKASH DWIVEDI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ashok v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Shahnawaj Ansari vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Nisha vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Sardar Singh Vs Administrator General U.P.

Abhishek Vishwakarma vs State of U.P. and Another

Aashish Kumar Sen vs State of U.P. and Another

Sagar vs State of U.P. and Another