Dheeraj Nishad Vs State of U.P through Secretary (Home) 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 to set aside the bail rejection order dated 04.07.2025 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act) Kushinagar Padrauna in Bail Application No.1595 of 2025 (UPKU010031052025) arising out of Case Crime No.158 of 2025, under Section 69 BNS and Section 3(2) (v), 3(1) (r) SC/ST Act, Police Station Khadda, District Kushinagar Padrauna.

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, the learned AGA for the Staterespondent no.1 and perused the entire record. Despite service of notice, none has appeared on behalf of respondent no.2.

¶13

Prosecution story is that the appellant has made physical relation with the victim on the pretext of marriage.

¶14

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. It is an admitted fact that the victim is a married lady aged about 21 years. As per statement of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of BNSS, the victim has not levelled any allegation of rape against the appellant and has stated that she knows the appellant for the last 7-8 years, therefore, it can be inferred that the victim is a consenting party. Victim was taken for medically

¶15

CRLA No. 6535 of 2025

¶16

2

¶17

examined but she denied for her internal or external examination. Essential ingredients to constitute the offence under the SC/ST Act are lacking in the matter. Further submission is that trial has not been started as yet and there is no possibility of early conclusion of trial, hence, the appellant may be enlarged on bail. Appellant is languishing in jail since 24.05.2025 having no previous 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.

¶18

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the the prayer for bail of the appellant.

¶19

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.

¶20

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.

¶21

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

¶22

Let the appellant- Dheeraj Nishad, 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.

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

(iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of

¶27

CRLA No. 6535 of 2025

¶28

3

¶29

which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶30

(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.

¶31

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

¶32

September 9, 2025 Ajeet

¶33

(Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.)

¶34

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

Dheeraj Nishad v. State of U.P through Secretary (Home) and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dheeraj Nishad v. State of U.P through Secretary (Home) 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