Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:39381 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3583 of 2025 Applicant :- Iqbal Khan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Alok Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Alok Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the material placed on record. 3. Learned A.G.A. has informed that the notice to the informant has been served on 26.01.2025 but none is present on behalf of the informant. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 264 of 2024, under Sections 65(2) of BNS and Section 5M/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Crossing Republic, District Ghaziabad, during the pendency of trial. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. The FIR is delayed by about 7 days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. It is next stated that there is no medical corroboration of the said incident. The statement of the informant and his wife are self-contradictory as the victim has given her statements to both of them differently, as such the applicant is entitled for bail. 6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail on the ground that the allegations in the FIR stands corroborated by the medical report whereby redness was present at her vital part, as such the applicant is not entitled for bail. 7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the medical report as indicated by learned A.G.A., I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. 8. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected. 9. 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. 10. 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 :- 19.3.2025 Sumit S (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad