Salman Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Salman Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal allowed; bail-rejection order dated 22.4.2025 of Special Judge (S.C./S.T. (P.A.) Act), Moradabad, set aside; appellant Salman to be released on bail in Case Crime No. 162 of 2024 on a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount (sureties to be verified before the release order), subject to five stated conditions (no tampering with evidence; no pressurising/intimidating prosecution witnesses; appearance before trial court on fixed dates unless exempted; no commission of similar offence; no direct or indirect inducement, threat or promise to dissuade disclosure), with prosecution free to seek bail cancellation before this Court on breach of any condition.

Issue for consideration

Whether the bail rejection order dated 22.4.2025 of the Special Judge (S.C./S.T. (P.A.) Act), Moradabad, suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court. +1 more

Court's answer

The Court below erred in rejecting the appellant's bail application; the impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and is liable to be set aside.

Ratio / Principle

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence, the evidence, the complicity of the accused, the role assigned to the appellant and the nature of injury, the appellant has made out a case for bail.

Key takeaways

The criminal appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the appellant's bail application is set aside.ratio¶8
The appellant Salman shall be released on bail in Case Crime No. 162 of 2024 on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with sureties to be verified before issuance of the release order, subject to conditions that he will not tamper with evidence, will not pressurise or intimidate prosecution witnesses, will appear before the trial court on dates fixed unless exempted, will not commit a similar offence, and will not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to dissuade any person acquainted with the facts from disclosing them to the Court or police.ratio¶9

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Shekhar Kumar Yadav, J.), Criminal Appeal No. 5455 of 2025 under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Order dated 22.8.2025: Appeal by Salman against the bail-rejection order dated 22.4.2025 of the Special Judge (S.C./S.T. (P.A.) Act), Moradabad, in Bail Application No. 1221 of 2025, S.T. No. 521 of 2024, arising from Case Crime No. 162 of 2024 under Sections 366, 376 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(V) S.C./S.T. Act, P.S. Mundapandey, District Moradabad. Counsel for the appellant submitted that the FIR was delayed by three days, P.W.-1 (first informant) and P.W.-2 (victim) had not supported the prosecution story (P.W.-2 turning hostile), the medical report did not corroborate, only two of eleven witnesses had been examined, and the appellant had been in jail since 06.04.2024. Held: considering the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and role assigned, the appellant made out a case for bail; the Court below erred and the impugned order suffered from infirmity and illegality; appeal allowed, bail-rejection order set aside; appellant to be released on a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount (sureties verified before release), subject to conditions barring tampering, intimidation of witnesses, absence on fixed dates, commission of similar offences, or inducement/threat/promise to dissuade disclosure, with liberty to the prosecution to seek bail cancellation before this Court on any breach.