Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:21312 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3731 of 2025 Applicant :- Rupesh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Jagdish Prasad Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- Ashish Mishra,G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Jagdish Prasad Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ashish Mishra, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri J.K. Chaurasia, learned State Law Officer and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 194 of 2024, U/S 65(1), 351(2) B.N.S. and 3/4(2) POCSO Act, Police Station Charthawal, District Muzaffarnagar, during the pendency of trial. PROSECUTION STORY: 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have committed rape with the victim in the sugarcane field on 22.9.2024 at about 6.00 am. 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. He has nothing to do with the said offence. 6. The FIR is delayed by more than one day and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 7. No external injury has been sustained by the victim to corroborate the prosecution story of forcible sexual assault, although some internal injury can be observed but it can be self- inflicted. It is a case of false implication, as there was a feud between the parties over money. 8. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. 9. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 25.9.2024. 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 internal parts of the body, which are vital organs, were found bleeding on touch and there were injuries observed in them. CONCLUSION: 11. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the fact that the victim has sustained injuries on her vital parts, which corroborate the allegations made in the FIR, 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 :- 14.2.2025 Shalini (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad