Ajay @ Kanbahawa Garg 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 to set aside the bail rejection order dated 08.08.2025 passed by Special Judge SC/ST (P.A.) Act Chitrakoot in Bail Application No.690 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime No.47 of 2025, under Sections 64 (1), 351(2) of BNS and Section 3(2)(5) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station Sardhuwa, District Chitrakoot.

¶14

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

¶15

In short, the prosecution story is that on 27.04.2025 at about 12.25 Hrs victim, who is aged about 56 years, was protecting mango tree, the appellant came on the spot and dragged the victim towards canal and committed rape upon her. It is further alleged that the appellant has also given threat to kill her.

¶16

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

¶17

CRLA No. 7882 of 2025

¶18

2

¶19

is that the prosecution story is totally false and fabricated. Real fact is that the victim had borrowed money from the appellant and when the appellant demanded his money, the victim has falsely implicated the appellant. Essential ingredients to constitute the offence under the SC/ST Act are lacking in the matter as neither in the FIR nor in the statement of the victim, allegation of abusing has not been made. 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 08.05.2025 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.

¶20

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

¶21

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.

¶22

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.

¶23

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

¶24

Let the appellant- Ajay @ Kanbahawa Garg, 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.

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

(iii) The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless

¶28

CRLA No. 7882 of 2025

¶29

3

¶30

personal presence is exempted.

¶31

(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.

¶32

(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.

¶33

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

¶34

September 25, 2025 Ajeet

¶35

(Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.)

¶36

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

Ajay @ Kanbahawa Garg v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay @ Kanbahawa Garg 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