CRLA/2036/2025 of ATUL MISHRA Vs STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO. AND 2 OTHERS on 10 November 2025

1. As per Office report dated 06.08.2025, the service of notice upon opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 is sufficient. Today, when the case called out, no one appeared on behalf of opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 to oppose the present bail appeal. In this background of the case, this Court proceeded to decide the appeal on merits.

2. Heard.

3. By means of instant appeal under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989 the appellant has challenged the impugned order dated 23.06.2025 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Raebareli in Bail Application No. 1546 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 0078 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 131, 115(2), 352, 351(3), 109(1) BNS and Sections 3(2)V of SC/ST Act, P.S.-Nasirabad, District-Raebareli.

4. It is stated that if the case of prosecution is taken on its face value, then in that eventuality, it can be inferred that the appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case.

5. It is also stated that according to the FIR in issue, the basis of pending criminal proceedings, lodged on 21.05.2025 five named and 8-10 unknown persons assaulted the informant namely Himanshu S/o Ramraj and also Boby S/o Shiv Prasad. In the FIR specific role has been assigned to Atul Mishra with regard to injury sustained by injured/Boby and thus, except Atul Mishra general role has been assigned to all the accused.

6. It is also stated that a perusal of the injury report of injured Himanshu Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Vyas Narayan Shukla, Abhishek Shukla Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A., Chandra Kishore, Rajesh Kumar Shukla Atul Mishra .....Appellant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s)

indicates that all the injuries were simple in nature and could be caused by hard and blunt object.

7. On conjoint reading of Medico Legal Reports on record of Boby S/o Shiv Prasad would indicate that the offence would fall under Section 325 IPC.

8. Further stated that altercation took place between the parties without premeditation of mind/on spur of moment and as such the offence under Section 308 would not be attracted.

9. Thus, taking note of aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as also that the appellant is in incarceration since 31.05.2025, indulgence of this Court is required in the matter and the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appeal is liable to be allowed.

10. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of the appellant, however, he could not dispute the above contentions made by the appellant's counsel.

11. Considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A., and gone through the contents of the appeal, impugned order, F.I.R., medical report as well as other relevant documents including the statement(s) recorded by the Investigating Officer during investigation.

12. Upon due consideration of above facts and circumstances including the statement(s) of the victim and contents of the FIR as also keeping in view the fact that the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, this Court is of the view that the appeal has substance and it is accordingly, allowed.

13. The impugned order dated 23.06.2025 passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Raebareli in Bail Application No. 1546 of 2025, arising out of Case Crime No. 0078 of 2025, under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 131, 115(2), 352, 351(3), 109(1) BNS and Sections 3(2)V of SC/ST Act, P.S.- Nasirabad, District-Raebareli, is hereby set aside.

14. Let appellant-Atul Mishra be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on her furnishing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions :-

(i) The appellant will cooperate with the prosecution during trial. CRLA No. 2036 of 2025

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

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

(iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence.

(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.

(vi) The appellant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel.

(vii) The appellant will not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court.

(viii) The appellant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

15. As this order relates to enlargement of the appellant on bail, it is clarified that observations made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation made in this order. November 10, 2025 Vinay/- CRLA No. 2036 of 2025

(Saurabh Lavania,J.) Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench