JUDGMENT : 1. The present appeal has been filed under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 (for short "the Act of 2015"). The appellant has been arrested in connection with FIR No.251/2020 registered at Police Station Sultanpur, Kota for the offence(s) under Section(s) 354 (D) & 306 IPC and under Sections 3(1)(w)(i) & 3(2)(v) of the Act of 2015 and later on for the offence(s) under Section(s) 354 (D) & 306 IPC and under Sections 3(1)(w)(i) & 3(2)(va) of the Act of 2015. 2. It is contended by learned Senior Counsel for the appellant that from the statements of the prosecution witnesses recorded so far, it is not revealed that the deceased-Reena committed suicide on account of harassment and torture meted to her by the appellant. Drawing attention of this Court towards the cross- examination of Harivallabh Karad (PW-2), father of the deceased, learned Senior Counsel submitted that his allegation is based on information furnished by Govind and villagers whereas, as per cross-examination of Govind (PW-4), the allegations are hearsay only. He submitted that even the photographer, Rajendra Singh (PW-1) has not supported the prosecution story as is evident from his cross-examination. Learned Senior Counsel contended that the prosecution story is heavily based upon WhatsApp messages exchanged in between the deceased and the appellant as available in the mobile phone of the deceased; but, the record reveals only one message by the deceased to the appellant that too of about 11:00 AM on 17.11.2020 whereas, Reena has already died at about 8:00 AM on that day. He submitted that the appellant is in custody since 09.02.2021 and prayed for his release on bail. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant opposing the appeal submitted that from the SMS/WhatsApp messages exchanged in between the deceased and the appellant, it is apparent that the deceased was harassed and tortured by the appellant to such an extent that before her scheduled marriage on 12.12.2020, she committed suicide. They submitted that in view of the incriminating evidence available against the appellant on record, he does not deserve indulgence of bail. 4. Heard and considered. 5. They submitted that in view of the incriminating evidence available against the appellant on record, he does not deserve indulgence of bail. 4. Heard and considered. 5. The first criminal appeal filed by the appellant after submission of charge-sheet was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 18.05.2021 which reads as under:- "After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the appellant wants to withdraw this appeal at this stage. The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn." 6. Thereafter, statements of as many as five prosecution witnesses have been recorded. A perusal of the statements of Smt. Sanju Bai (PW-5), mother of the deceased reveals specific allegation against the appellant of subjecting the deceased to blackmail and torture to an extent which compelled her to commit suicide. The charge-sheet reveals that similar allegations have been levelled by the prosecution witnesses such as Yash Karad (brother of the deceased), Smt. Nisha Bai (Neighbourer of the deceased) and Smt. Sakshi Kumari (sister of the deceased) in their statements recorded under Section 161 CrPC, who are yet to be examined. It is trite law that marshalling of evidence is impermissible at the stage of consideration of bail application which is to be done by the learned trial Court at the appropriate stage. Contention of the learned Senior Counsel for the appellant based on cross-examination of PW-1, PW-2 & PW-4 as also the WhatsApp messages exchanged in between the parties, are subject-matter of trial. 7. In view of the nature and gravity of allegation against the appellant, no case for grant of bail is made out. 8. The appeal is dismissed accordingly.