Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:27605 Court No. - 73 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42629 of 2024 Applicant :- Anil Kumar @ Lala Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Kuldeep Singh,Pankaj Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kiran Singh Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record. 2. The present second bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 505 of 2020, under Sections 363, 376-A, 376-B I.P.C. and Section 5M/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station - Karchhana, District - Prayagraj, with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail. 3. The first bail application of applicant was rejected by this Court vide order dated 19.01.2024, which is reproduced as below:- "1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.505 of 2020, under Sections 363, 376-A,B IPC and Section 5-M/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Karchhana, District Prayagraj, with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant-accused is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. The first information report was lodged under Sections 363, 376, 511 IPC and 7/8 POCSO Act and there was no allegation of rape in the first information report. During investigation in her statement, victim has developed her version and made false allegation of rape against the applicant. Statement of victim, recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., were referred and it was submitted that there are contradictions in the statements of victim. In pathological report, no spermatozoa has been found. It was submitted that the grant-mother of the victim is village pradhan and who ever raised any grievance against village pradhan, he was falsely implicated in some case. Earlier also the informant lodged a case under Section 376 IPC. Lastly it was submitted that applicant accused is languishing in jail since 23.10.2020 and the criminal history of one case shown against the applicant, has duly been explained. 4. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the application and submitted that the victim is a five years old girl and in her statement under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., she has made clear allegation against the applicant that he has molested her and her version is supported by medical examination report, wherein, the concern doctor has noted that there were signs suggestive of recent forceful penetration of vagina and anus. It was also submitted that the applicant was apprehended on spot. 5. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusations and all attending facts and circumstances, no case for grant of bail is made out. 6. Accordingly, the instant bail application filed on behalf of the applicant Anil Kumar @ Lala is hereby rejected. 7. However, considering the period of detention of the applicant, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and decide the same as early as possible preferably within a period of nine months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order." 4. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. There is contradiction in the statement of victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. In pathological report, no spermatozoa has been found. It is further submitted that after rejection of first bail application of applicant, statement of victim and other material witnesses have been recorded before the Trial Court and thus, there is no possibility of tampering with the evidence. The applicant is in jail since 23.10.2020 and thus, he has already undergone detention of more than four years. It was stated that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 5. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the bail application and submitted that victim was a five years old girl and in her statement recorded before the Trial Court, she has made serious allegations against the applicant. 6. I have considered the submissions and perused the record. 7. Victim is stated that she is 5-6 years old girl. In her statement before the Trial Court, she has made serious allegation of molestation against the applicant. In medical examination report, it was mentioned that there were signs suggestive of recent forceful penetration of vagina and anus. 8. Considering entire facts, no case for grant of bail is made out. 9. Accordingly, the instant second bail application filed on behalf of applicant is rejected. 10. However, considering the period of detention of applicant, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and to conclude the same, as early as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 11. A copy of this order be transmitted to the Trial Court concerned for necessary compliance. Order Date :- 27.2.2025 SK Srivastava Digitally signed by :- SAILESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad