HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39508 of 2024 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Vaibhav Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajesh Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the first informant/opp. party no.4, Sri Ajay Singh, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the material on record. 3. This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant-Narendra @ Dhilla, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.118 of 2024, u/s 363, 342, 376(3), 506 IPC and Section 4(2) POCSO Act, P.S. Malwan, District Fatehpur. 4. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 9.6.2024 by Kailash against unknown persons alleging therein that his niece aged about 13 years is missing since 8.6.2024 from 11 a.m. Her mobile phone is switched-off. A report be lodged and action be taken. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further argued that the niece of the first informant was recovered on 22.6.2024 and her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded wherein she states that the applicant called her on 8.6.2024 where she went and applicant took her with him and tied on a cot and committed rape upon her. Then on 22.6.2024 the applicant dropped her back. It is argued that the said allegation is totally Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ashok Kumar Mishra, Krishna Kant Tiwari, Phool Singh Yadav, Vaibhav Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Rajesh Kumar Verma Narendra Alias Dhilla .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) false and without any credible evidence inasmuch as the victim was medically examined but she was not found to have received any injury either on her body or on her private part. It is further argued that implication of the applicant in the present case is with malafide intentions as the first informant had taken loan of Rs.2 lakh from the applicant and when he demanded refund, he has been falsely implicated in the present case, para 13 of the affidavit in support of bail application has been placed before the Court. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history as stated in para 17 of the affidavit and is in jail since 13.7.2024. 6. Per contra learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant is named by the victim in both her statements recorded during investigation and allegation of rape has been levelled against the applicant after tying the victim on a cot. It is further argued that there is no reason for false implication of the applicant. It is further argued that no such loan was taken by the first informant from the applicant and even the applicant was not in a status to give any loan. The victim is a minor girl aged about 12 years as such bail application of the applicant be rejected. 7. After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the victim is a minor girl aged about 12 years. The applicant is named in the statements of the victim and there are allegations of rape against the applicant after tying her on a cot. The charge sheet has been submitted against the applicant. There is no reason stated for false implication and the reason as enumerated in para 13 does not at all transpire confidence. 8. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find it a fit case for bail, hence, the bail application is rejected. September 19, 2025 Gaurav Kuls BAIL No. 39508 of 2024 2 (Samit Gopal,J.) Digitally signed by :- GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad