HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 4100 of 2025 Court No. - 83 HON'BLE SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA as well as perused the entire record. 2.The present criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been filed by the appellant-Saleem Ahmad to set aside the order dated 23.04.2025 in IIIrd Bail Application No. 1014 of 25 and to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 38 of 2022, under Sections 376(2)(N), 328, 147, 323, 504, 506 IPC and & Section 3(2)(V) S.C./S.T. Act, P.S. Dhomanganj, District Prayagraj. 3. According to prosecution version the victim was doing work in a nursing home, in a short distance one Saleem Ahmad, resident of Gayasuddinpur, Mundera was also doing work in a saloon shop, he took the mobile number of the victim from some other of the nursing home and used to talk with the victim. Thereafter he took her away in a relative house and offered cold drink, consequently she became unconscious, thereafter he raped with her, when she become conscious, he threatened her life. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has not committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR. The FIR of the incident has been lodged after six months of the incident. The appellant is languishing in jail since 30.01.2022. Versus Counsel for Appellant(s) : Satish Sharma Counsel for Respondent(s) : G.A. Saleem Ahmad .....Appellant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) Further submission is that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellants suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court. 4. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and submits that the appellant is the main accused person and also submitted that victim was threatened by the appellant and other persons for dire consequences, therefore, the appellant is not entitled for bail. 5. 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. 6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the statement of the injured as recorded before his death, there is no new ground to enlarge the appellant on bail. There is no illegality or perversity in the impugned order passed by the learned Special Judge SC/ST Act, the appeal deserves to be dismissed. 7. Accordingly, this criminal appeal is, hereby, dismissed. September 11, 2025 RPD CRLA No. 4100 of 2025 2 (Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.) Digitally signed by :- RATAN PRAKASH DWIVEDI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- RATAN PRAKASH DWIVEDI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad