Ganga Ram vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko ...

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent no.1-State.

2. Since charge sheet has not been filed under any of the Sections of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, therefore, notices to respondent no.2 stand dispensed with.

3. This Criminal Appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 14A(2) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 with a prayer to set aside order dated 20.04.2026 passed by Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act, Raebareli on Bail Application arising out of Case Crime No.79 of 2024 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 308 I.P.C. P.S. Mohanganj, District Amethi refusing bail to appellant. Further, a prayer has been made to enlarge the appellant on bail in the said case crime.

4. As per contents of first information report, a minor dispute had arisen on 25.03.2024 with regard to burning of holi whereafter at about 2:00 P.M., the nominated persons are said to have attacked and assaulted the complainant while making caste-based insults. It is stated that as a result of assault, the informant suffered serious head injuries.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has been falsely implicated in allegations levelled against him which would be evident from fact that he is not named in the F.I.R. and his name has been subsequently included in the statement of informant, Dharmendra Pasi recorded under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. It is submitted that charge sheet has been filed excluding provisions of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and is under Sections 323, 504, 506, 308 I.P.C. whereunder the maximum punishment is up to seven years' imprisonment, due to which notice under Section 41A Cr.P.C. was issued to appellant and he had cooperated in the investigation wehereafter charge sheet has been filed. It is submitted that only general allegations of causing injury have been levelled without any specific role being assigned to appellant who does not have any previous criminal history.

6. Learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the appeal with submission that statement of informant as an injured along with that of other injured Ram Prasad has clearly nominated appellant as one of the persons who had assaulted them. He has also adverted to injury report to indicate that head injuries include a fracture. It is however admitted that appellant does not have any previous criminal history and had cooperated during investigation.

7. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material on record, it appears that although the injured is the informant but had failed to indicate the name of appellant in the F.I.R. and has subsequently nominated him in his statement recorded under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. As per the statements of injured, general allegations have been levelled against all the nominated persons of having assaulted and caused injuries. It is also on record that charge sheet has not been filed under any provisions of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and notice had been issued under Section 41A Cr.P.C. The appellant is said to have cooperated during investigation whereafter charge sheet was filed and he does not have any previous criminal history.

8. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, without commenting on merits, I am of the view that the learned court below has failed to appreciate the material available on record. The order passed by the court below is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the order dated 20.04.2026 is set aside.

9. Let appellant/applicant GangaRam involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

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

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

(iii) The applicant 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 otherwise tamper with the evidence.

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code (now Section 269 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023).

(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (bow Section 84 BNSS) is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code (now Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023).

10. The pending application if any too stands disposed of.

(Manish Mathur,J.)

May 7, 2026

kvg/-