Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:75799 Court No. - 78 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42563 of 2024 Applicant :- Monu Alias Sagar Chaudhary Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Shukla,Tiwari Ajay Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J. 1-The instant matter relates to Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. 2-Vide order of this Court dated 04.03.2025, notice was issued to opposite party nos. 2 (complainant) and 3 (C.W.C.) but despite service of notice, no one has put in appearance on their behalf, therefore, this Court proceeds to hear this matter on its merit. 3-Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State. 4-By means of this bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., applicant-Monu Alias Sagar Chaudhary, who is involved in Case Crime No. 247 of 2024, under Sections 376, 506 I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Ghaziabad seeks enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial. 5-As per prosecution case in brief, complainant who is father of the victim got an F.I.R. lodged on 31.05.2024 for an incident which took place on 06.05.2024 against the applicant for the alleged offence under Sections 376, 506 I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 POCSO Act stating inter-alia that the complainant belongs to a labour class and is financially very poor. The present applicant, who is a contractor, had kept his ill eyes on his daughter from the very first day. On 06.05.2024, the applicant on the pretext of work of the company, took his daughter to a hotel and committed rape on her but due to fear, she did not tell anything about the incident. On 12.05.2024, applicant again took her to a hotel and committed rape on her. Thereafter, she was scared and started avoiding to go to the company and finally on 17.05.2024, she refused to go to the company. F.I.R. also alleges that on being repeatedly asked, she narrated the entire incident to her father that what was happened with her and when the complainant confronted the applicant, applicant threatened him to face consequences. 6-The main substratum of argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The F.I.R. was lodged after delay of 17 days' without any plausible explanation. It is next submitted that in the medical examination report, everything has come in a normal range, hence, the same does not corroborates with the prosecution case. In the first information report, date of the incident was shown as 06.05.2024 whereas the victim, in her statement, has disclosed the date of incident as 12.05.2024. On the strength of aforesaid submissions, it is argued that the prosecution case is false and no reliance can be placed on the statement of the victim. Lastly it is submitted that the applicant, who is languishing in jail since 08.06.2024, may be enlarged on bail. 7-On the other hand, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that as per the prosecution case, as mentioned in the F.I.R., incident of rape on victim by the applicant took place twice on 06.05.2024 and 12.05.2024, which is corroborated from the statement of the victim. Apart from this, the investigating officer has also collected the CCTV footage of a hotel, in which the applicant along with the victim are seen going to hotel. The reference of the said CCTV footage has been mentioned in Parcha No. 5 of the case diary. Much emphasis has been given by contending that the victim, in her statements under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., have made clear allegation of rape against the applicant, hence, the bail application of the applicant is liable to be rejected. 8-Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, I find that it is not in dispute that the victim is a minor child, as defined under Section 2(d) of POCSO Act. The F.I.R. has been lodged by the father of the victim on the narration of the incident by the victim. The victim, in her statements under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., has also made clear allegation of rape against the applicant giving vivid description of the incident. As on date, I do not find any good ground to disbelieve the statements of the victim. 9-Sexual violence apart from being a dehumanizing act is an unlawful intrusion of the right to privacy and sanctity of a female. It is a serious blow to her supreme honour and offends her self esteem and dignity. It degrades and humiliates the victim and where the victim is a helpless innocent child, it leaves behind a traumatic experience. It is often seen that a child who is raped undergoes two crises- the rape and the subsequent trial. While the first seriously wounds her dignity, curbs her individual, destroys her sense of security and may often ruin her physically, the second is no less potent of mischief inasmuch as it not only force her to re-live through the traumatic experience, but also does so in the glare of publicity in a totally alien atmosphere, with the whole apparatus and paraphernalia of the criminal justice system focused upon her. 10-Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the submissions advanced on behalf of parties, gravity of offence, role assigned to applicant, severity of punishment and the statements of the victim, I do not find any good ground to enlarge the applicant on bail. 11-Accordingly, the instant bail application is rejected. 12-It is made clear that the observation contained in the instant order is confined to the issue of bail and shall not affect the merit of the trial. Order Date :- 9.5.2025 Saurabh Digitally signed by :- SAURABH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad