Subham Kashyap and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

As per office report, notice has been served on opposite party no. 2, however, none has appeared on behalf of opposite party no.2 to oppose the appeal.

¶13

This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) of The Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been preferred by the appellants, namely, Subham Kashyap, Kuldeep Kashyap and Rohit Kumar Kashyap with the prayer to allow the appeal, set aside the bail rejection order dated 22.8.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, S.C./S.T. ( P.A.) Act, Kaushambi and to release the appellants on bail in Case Crime No.160 of 2024, under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3 (2) (va), 3(1)(s) of SC /ST (P.A.) Act, at Police Station - Manjhanpur, District Kaushambi.

¶14

Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that certain dispute between appellants and informant took place on 25.5.2024 at about 5:00 PM. It has been alleged by informant that all appellants chased the informant and abused her by referring to her caste. Learned counsel has further submitted that allegation of assault has also been made by informant. However, injuries sustained by informant are simple in nature, therefore, appellants are entitled for bail. The appellants are in jail since 22.8.2025.

¶15

Learned A.G.A. for State has submitted that informant has received six injuries on her person. She has received lacerated wound on the base of her left thumb. It was further submitted that informant was assaulted by appellants on the ground that she belonged to community of SC/ST, therefore, the bail of the appellants are liable to be rejected.

¶16

I have considered the rival submissions so made and have gone through the entire record.

¶17

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in

¶18

CRLA No. 8054 of 2025

¶19

2

¶20

view the nature of the offence, nature of injuries, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the Court is of the opinion that the appellants have made out a case for bail.

¶21

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

¶22

Let the appellants- Subham Kashyap, Kuldeep Kashyap and Rohit Kumar Kashyap involved in Case Crime No.160 of 2024, under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3 (2) (va), 3(1)(s) of SC /ST (P.A.) Act, at Police Station - Manjhanpur, District Kaushambi, 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 appellants will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

(iv) The appellants shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected, of the commission of which they are suspected.

¶27

(v) The appellants 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶28

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the concerned Court shall be at liberty to take appropriate coercive action for appearance of the accused or to cancel the bail granted.

¶29

(Anil Kumar-X,J.)

¶30

October 7, 2025 Mukesh

¶31

Digitally signed by :- MUKESH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Subham Kashyap and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subham Kashyap and 2 Others 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

Raj @ Kallan vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Seema Chaudhary and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Aditya Singh Alias Golu vs State of U.P. and Another

Basant @ Basanth vs State of U.P. and Another

Raj Kumar Maurya vs State of U.P. and Another

Jagarnath vs State of Uttar Pradesh and 3 Others