HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47515 of 2024 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Ms. Rachna Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajay Singh, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the material on record. 3. Sri Abhay Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the first informant/O.P. No.2 is not present even in the revised list. 4. This bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed by the applicant Shakeel, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 346 of 2024, under Sections 64(1), 74, 75(2), 76 BNS and Section 5-M/6 POCSO Act, registered at P.S. Kakod, District Bulandshahr. 5. Counter affidavit dated 31.07.2025 of the State is on record. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that she does not propose to file any rejoinder affidavit to the same. The Court thus proceeds to hear the matter. 6. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 14.10.2024 by Deepak Kumar against the applicant alleging therein that his daughter aged about 4 years had gone to the merchant shop of the applicant on 14.10.2024 at about 05:00 pm to purchase toffee where the shopkeeper pulled her inside and took out her underwear and did immoral acts with her on which she shouted and on her shouts people of nearby reached there and saver her. She is terrified. Report be lodged and action be taken. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rachna Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Abhay Pratap Singh, G.A. Shakeel .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the prosecution story is not consistent. It is submitted that Shivani has been examined as a witness of the incident who states of sending the victim girl to the said shop for purchase of namkeen. It is submitted that even the victim states of going to the shop after being sent by Shivani to purchase the namkeen. It is submitted that the same is thus having contradictions with the prosecution case as in the FIR the first informant who is the father of the victim states that she had gone to purchase toffee. It is submitted that in so far as the allegations of sexual assault on the victim are concerned, there is no injury either on her private part or on her body found by the doctor during medical examination. It is submitted that even the mother of the victim was interrogated who does not in any manner state of any credible evidence in so far as the applicant is concerned. It is submitted while placing para 16 of the affidavit that the informant had taken goods on credit from the shop of the applicant since last six months due to which he had lost a lot of money and an altercation took place after which the first informant has been falsely implicated the applicant. Further while placing para 20 of the affidavit it is submitted that the applicant is aged about 34 years having four children and have been falsely implicated due to enmity and party-bandi. It is submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 22 of the affidavit and is in jail since 15.10.2024. 8. Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the victim is a minor girl aged about 4 years. In so far as the sexual offence is concerned, there is no allegation of any strong sexual offence against the applicant but there is an immoral act done by the applicant with the victim. It is submitted that applicant with the victim had proceeded with immoral acts with her which has been stated in the FIR, in the statement of Shivani and also in both the statements of the victim. It is submitted that as such the implication of the applicant is there in the present case. It is submitted that there is no reason for false implication of the applicant and as such the prayer for bail of the applicant be rejected. In so far as the ground for false implication has taken in para 16 and 20 of the affidavit is concerned the same is without any basis. 9. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the victim is a minor child aged about 4 years. The applicant is named in the FIR and there are allegations of sexual assault on the victim. BAIL No. 47515 of 2024 2 Shivani is a witness who has sent the victim girl to the shop of the applicant for purchase items. She states of seeing the applicant doing immoral acts with her and then she saved her from him. The victim also states of doing immoral act with her by the applicant. No ground for bail is made out. I do not find it a fit case for bail. 10. Considering the totality of the case in particular, nature of evidence available on record, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 11. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected. 12. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. September 19, 2025 M. ARIF BAIL No. 47515 of 2024 3 (Samit Gopal,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad