Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:80586 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4205 of 2025 Applicant :- Kalicharan Alias Karu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajit Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. is taken on record. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant does not proposes to file any rejoinder affidavit to the counter affidavit filed by State. 4. Heard Sri Syed Irfan Ali, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ajit Kumar, learned counsel for applicant, Sri V.K.S. Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 5. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.243 of 2024, under Sections 64(2)K, 333, 351(3) B.N.S., Police Station Jalesar, District Etah with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 6. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have barged into the house of the informant on 27.07.2024 at about 1:00 p.m. and had committed rape with his mentally ill daughter. On hearing her shrieks, the members of the locality are stated to have gathered there, whereby one Prashant is stated to have climbed the wall and found the applicant raping the daughter of the informant and he opened the door from inside, as such, the applicant ran away from the place of occurrence pushing away the villagers. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the FIR is delayed by about seven hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. There is no medical corroboration of the incident as no injury was observed by the doctor. The applicant is the relative of the victim and he and the informant used to drink along, as such, had a verbal argument with him, as such, the instant FIR has been instituted. 8. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that at the time of medical examination, it was observed that the victim was of unsound mind, as such, it was stated that instead of the victim, the statement of her parents shall be recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S., but the Investigating Officer has not got their statements recorded rather one neighbour Prashant has been examined under Section 183 B.N.S.S., as such, his statement has no evidentiary value. 9. Learned counsel for the applicant has also stated that there is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 28.07.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 10. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the said witness Prashant is the star witness as he was the one who had climbed the wall and entered the room and had seen the applicant committing the said offence and he opened the door from inside, as such, the applicant escaped from the place of occurrence. 11. Learned A.G.A. has further stated that in the said statement, eye-witness Prashant has stated that the applicant was in an inebriated state coupled with the fact that the victim being of unsound mind, her consent cannot be considered at all and the applicant is not entitled for bail. 12. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the victim is of unsound mind coupled with the fact that the FIR has been instituted the same evening of the incident and also taking into consideration the statement of the said eye-witness Prashant, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. 13. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected. 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 :- 15.5.2025 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad