Raju Paswan Vs State of U.P. and Another

The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant- Raju Paswan to set aside the order dated 16.04.2025 in Bail Application No. 593 of 25 and to release him on bail in S.T. No. 322 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime No. 02 of 2025, under Sections 103 (1), 352 BNS and section 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act, P.S. Ghazipur, District Fatehpur.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, the learned AGA for the Staterespondent no.1 and perused the entire record.

¶11

Submission of learned counsel for 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 fabricated. Essential ingredients to constitute the offence under the SC/ST Act are lacking in the matter. Appellant is languishing in jail since 07.01.2025 . Learned counsel for the appellant next submitted that the deceased has received burn injuries when he was taking fire heat under intoxication of liquor and fell down. Thereafter the deceased was died due to septicemia, lack of proper treatment. The appellant has no criminal history. During

¶12

CRLA No. 4623 of 2025

¶13

2

¶14

trial P.W. 1 Hori Lal who is brother of the deceased and P.W. 2 who is son of the deceased have become hostile and have not supported the prosecution story. There is no direct or indirect evidence against the appellant. Further submission is that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court.

¶15

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.

¶16

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.

¶17

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.

¶18

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

¶19

Let the appellant- Raju Paswan 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.

¶20

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

¶21

(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.

¶22

CRLA No. 4623 of 2025

¶23

3

¶24

(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.

¶25

(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.

¶26

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

¶27

(Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.)

¶28

September 24, 2025

¶29

RPD

¶30

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

Raju Paswan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raju Paswan 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