Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:111263 Court No. - 83 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1913 of 2025 Appellant :- Asif Alias Ashu Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Sanjai Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant - Asif Alias Ashu with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 23.1.2025 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge / Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Bulandshahr and to release the appellant on bail in case crime no. 0371 of 2024 under Sections 64,(1), 333, 351(2) of BNS and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Chatari, District Bulandshahr. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned AGA and perused the entire record. None is present for the informant / opposite party no.2. 3. Prosecution case, as culled out from the record, is that on 20.10.2024 at about 5.30 p.m. the present appellant entered into the house of the victim when she was all alone and after locking the door forceful rape was committed by him with her. F.I.R. was lodged on the next day and investigation started which culminated into charge sheet. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He has not committed the present offence. Alleged offences are not attracted against him. It is further submitted that the appellant has no concern at all with the alleged offence. Entire prosecution story is based on false and concocted facts. In the F.I.R. it was mentioned that the victim was minor at the time of the incident but however during investigation this version was found false and no charge sheet under the POCSO Act was filed. It is also submitted that no external injury has been found upon the body of the victim in her medical report which was probable when protest would have been made by her at the time of the commission of the offence. There are material contradictions in the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of BNSS. In fact it is a case of consensual physical relationship between the two major persons of opposite sex. It is also submitted that the appellant has no criminal history to his credit. He is in jail since 23.10.2024. The Court concerned while passing the impugned order did not take into account the facts and evidence available on record in right perspective and erred in passing the same. It is lastly submitted that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court. 5. On the other hand, learned AGA opposing the prayer submitted that the appellant committed the present offence having knowledge that the victim belonged to scheduled caste community.There is no possibility of false implication of the present appellant in this case. It is also submitted that there is no material contradiction in the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of BNSS. In the medical report internal injuries have been found and the doctor has made a specific observation that signs found in the internal examination are suggestive of forceful vaginal penetration which are showing episode of sexual assault. There is presence of bleeding and discharge. There is ample evidence against the appellant on record. Offence committed by the present appellant is very serious and grievous. There is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order and appeal deserves to be dismissed. 6. 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. 7. It appears from the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and from perusal of material on record that the Court concerned has properly considered the case of the appellant while deciding the bail application. Hence, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, the fact that there is no possibility of false implication of the appellant at this stage, role attributed to the appellant, medical examination report of the victim and also the fact that a daring offence was committed by the appellant after entering into the house of the prosecutrix, the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has not made out a case for bail. The Court concerned passed a reasoned order while rejecting the bail application of the appellant. The impugned order does not suffer from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be affirmed and the appeal is liable to be dismissed. 8. Accordingly, the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is affirmed and the appeal is dismissed. Order Date :- 11.7.2025 safi Digitally signed by :- MAHBOOB SAFI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- MAHBOOB SAFI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad