Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:30577 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 6912 of 2024 Appellant :- Balaram Kushwaha Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Deepak Kumar Patel,Krishna Mohan Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- Awadhesh Prasad,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 with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 10.05.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions/Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Banda and to release the appellant on bail in Case Crime No. 79 of 2024, under Sections 376, 328, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)V SC/ST Act, Police Station Bisanda, District Banda. 2. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, the learned AGA for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and perused the entire record. 3. The prosecution case as unfolded in the F.I.R. in brief is that the married informant was feeling unwell and for her treatment on 03.03.2024 at about 5.00 P.M. she went to village doctor Balram Kushwaha where the accused doctor administered some intoxicated injection to the victim and she became unconscious and rape was committed upon her by him which belies after being conscious. However, the F.I.R. of this case was lodged on 09.03.2024. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent, he has not committed the alleged offence and has been falsely implicated in this case. Alleged offences are not attracted against him. It is further submitted that the appellant is an old family doctor having his wife and children with him. The allegations made in the F.I.R. are totally false and fabricated. It is next submitted that some money with regard to treatment was due to the informant and her husband prior to the incident and when it was demanded by the appellant, he was falsely implicated in the present case. It is also submitted that the F.I.R. of this Case has been lodged after six days of the incident without any plausible explanation of delay. It is further submitted that the contents of the F.I.R. and the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. are having material contradictions and particularly on the point as to whether the husband of the victim was present at his house or doing some job at Daman Diu at the relevant point of time. It is next submitted that charge sheet in this matter has been submitted but after submission of charge sheet, no witness has been examined so far. It is also submitted that the appellant is languishing in jail since 01.04.2024 having no criminal history. It is next submitted that some of the villagers in their statements stated that the victim is a very cunning lady and on previous occasions also she had falsely implicated to some other respectable persons for the charge of sexual offence. 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 A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 opposed the prayer for bail and it has been submitted that the husband of the informant victim was doing some job at Daman Diu and when he came back to the village, the F.I.R. of this case was lodged. It is next submitted that the contents of the F.I.R. and the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. are having no material contradictions and they are having the same allegations. The role of the appellant is well explained in the F.I.R. and statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. There is no possibility of false implication of the appellant. 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. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the gravity of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, role of the appellant, particularly keeping in view of the statements of the informant victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., this Court is of the opinion that no ground for bail is made out and the appeal deserves to be dismissed. 8. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. 9. However, the learned trial court is directed to make all endeavour to decide the trial as expeditiously as possibly, preferably within a period of two years from the date of production of certified copy of this order without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties, if there is no legal impediment. Order Date :- 4.3.2025 Rmk. Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad