Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:27011 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 7684 of 2024 Appellant :- Shakeel Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Dhirendra Babu Mishra,Pramod Kumar Srivastava,Ravindra Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Giridhary Lal Choudhary,Jeetendra Kumar,Nitin Kumar Sonkar,Sanjay Kumar Shukla Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record. Counter affidavit filed by the informant is taken on record. 2. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A (2) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant - Shakeel with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 11.7.2024 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Kaushambi in Bail Application No.173 of 2024. 3. An FIR was lodged under Section 354(ka), 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(5) and 3(1) dha SC/ST Act by the lady victim of this case bearing allegation that she was given lift by the named accused persons Pawan and Hasan to take her to her house but however on way on the gun point both the accused persons outraged the modesty of the lady victim. The incident happened on 25.1.2024 at about 8.00 pm. FIR was lodged and charge sheet was submitted. 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. Essential ingredients to establish an offence under SC/ST Act are also missing in this case. It is further submitted that the incident of case is said to have taken place on 25.1.2024 but the FIR of the same was lodged on 5.2.2024 without explaining the inordinate delay. It is also submitted that the medical evidence does not support the prosecution version. It is further submitted that in the FIR of this case the named accused persons Pawan and Hasan have been shown as the culprits and in the FIR even the existence of any third person has not been uttered, however, in her subsequent statements given to the police and Magistrate the victim/ informant made an improvement in this case and the present accused appellant also as the culprit of the case. It is also submitted that the victim of this case herself denied to be medically examined externally and internally and that is why there is no medical report on record. After investigation charge sheet has been submitted with the allegation of rape and presently both the named accused persons have been exonerated by the I.O. and on the basis of insufficient and false evidence the present appellant was implicated in this case. It is also submitted that the appellant has a criminal history of six cases, which has been explained in the affidavit. The trial Court 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. Appellant is in jail since 22.6.2024. 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 and learned counsel for the informant opposing the prayer for bail submitted that the appellant committed the present offence having knowledge that the victim belonged to scheduled caste community. There is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order dated 11.7.2024. It is further submitted that it is a case where rape was committed by the present appellant with the poor lady belonging to SC/ST caste. It is also submitted that the FIR is not the encyclopedia of any offence and the victim specifically named the present appellant as a principal offender of this case wherein rape was committed with her. 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 nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, also taken into account the fact that the victim herself denied to be examined internally and externally, the incarceration period also the fact that the present appellant is not named in the FIR. the Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The trial Court erred in rejecting the bail application. The impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set-aside and the appeal is to be allowed. 8. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is, hereby, set-aside. 9. Let the appellant - Shakeel involved in Case Crime No. 38 of 2024 under Sections 376, 504, 506 I.P.C. & Section 3(2)(5) and 3(1) dha SC/ST Act, Police Station - Saini, District- Kaushambi be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. (iv) The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. (v) The appellant 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 tamper with the evidence. 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 27.2.2025 Fhd Digitally signed by :- FAHAD NIYAZ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad