Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:65263 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41837 of 2024 Applicant :- Ramesh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Gyan Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party :- Binod Kumar Tripathi,G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Gyan Prakash, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Binod Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Pranshu Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.0292 of 2024, U/S 65(1), 75(2) B.N.S. and 4(2)/7/8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Jaithra, District Etah, during the pendency of trial. PROSECUTION STORY: 4. The applicant is stated to have harassed the victim sexually and outraged her modesty on 12.9.2024 at about 8.00 pm. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT: 5. The applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. It is stated that he has nothing to do with the said offence. 6. The FIR is delayed by about one day and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 7. The injuries are simple in nature and may be self-inflicted, as the applicant had an altercation with the informant 15 days before the alleged incident. 8. The victim, by her looks, seems to be major, although as per ossification test report, she is 14-15 years old. 9. The applicant is languishing in jail since 19.9.2024, having no criminal history and in case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF STATE/OPPOSITE PARTY: 10. The bail application has been opposed on the ground that the victim had sustained three injuries on her body and her private part was also found injured. The victim being minor, aged about 14-15 years only, the applicant is not entitled for bail. CONCLUSION: 11. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, the age of the victim being 14-15 years and there being injuries found on the body of the victim, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 12. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected. 13. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously, in view of the principle laid down in the recent judgements of the Supreme Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar vs. State of Punjab 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India (2017) 5 SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment. 14. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 28.4.2025 Shalini (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad