HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11994 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arun Sinha Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Siddarth Sinha the counsel for the informant as well as learned AGA and perused the record. 2. The accused-applicant seeks bail in FIR/Case Crime No.189 of 2025 under sections 65(1), 351(2), 352 BNS and section 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Bighapur, District Unnao. 3. In terms of the FIR, it was alleged that the informant knew the applicant and was called on 14.04.2025 and when the informant along with her daughter aged about 14 years reached there, she went to answer the natural call after leaving her daughter and when she came back, the daughter of the informant alleged that she was misbehaved and inappropriately touched. No allegation of rape were levelled. In the statement under section 180 BNSS, the victim once again reiterated that she was inappropriately touched. No allegation of rape were levelled. Even in the statement under section 183 BNSS, the victim did not alleged the commission of an offence, which can be termed as penetrative sexual assault as defined under section 3/5 of POCSO Act. The victim has refused to undergo the internal medical examination. 4. The counsel for the informant strongly opposes the bail application, however, he could not demonstrate the material to suggest or allege Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Manoj Kumar Gupta, Vijay Prakash Chaurasia Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Chhotelal @ Chhotelal Rajpoot .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. And 4 Others .....Opposite Party(s) penetrative sexual assault at the instance of the applicant. 5. Considering the fact that there were no allegations of a penetrative sexual assault in either of the two statements and the FIR coupled with the fact that the victim has refused to undergo medical examination and the criminal history has been duly explained, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Thus the bail application is allowed. 6. Let the applicant Chhotelal @ Chhotelal Rajpoot be released on bail in aforesaid FIR/Case Crime Number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty Thousand) each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions: (a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings; (b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and (c) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. 7. Needless to say that the statement of the victim shall take place in terms of the prescriptions contained in Section 35 of the POCSO Act. December 2, 2025 VNP/- BAIL No. 11994 of 2025 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- VISHVANATH PRASAD SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench