HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32938 of 2025 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J. 1. Ms. Amrita Rai Mishra, Advocate, has filed her memo of appearance on behalf of High Court Legal Service Committee, which is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Chandan Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as Ms. Amrita Rai Mishra, learned counsel for the High Court Legal Service Committee-opposite party No. 3 and perused the record. 3. By means of the instant bail application, the applicant, Sanjeev Kumar Alias Chhanga, is seeking bail in Case Crime No. 271 of 2025, under Sections 64(1), 351(3) of B.N.S. and Section 3/4 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Jhunsi, District Prayagraj. 4. The F.I.R. was lodged against the applicant with the allegation that he committed rape upon the minor daughter of the informant and he also threatened her for dire consequences. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that false and frivolous allegation has been made against the applicant. No such incident took place. The applicant has not committed any crime with the daughter of the informant. There is a delay of more than one day in lodging of the F.I.R., without there being any plausible explanation. Though the victim in her statements recorded under Section 180 & 183 B.N.S.S. has made specific allegation of forcible rape against the applicant, but in her medical examination no external or internal injury was found on her person, her hymen was found torn and healed, thus, there is no medical evidence regarding her sexual violence. Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn attention of this Court to a letter annexed as Annexure-5 to the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, in which the victim asked the applicant to took her with him and it has been claimed on behalf of applicant that the said letter was written by the victim herself. Thus, it is Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Chandra Jeet Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sanjeev Kumar Alias Chhanga .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case due to ulterior motive. The applicant is in jail since 21.08.2025, with no previous criminal antecedents to his credit. 6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party No. 3 have opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by submitting that the victim in her statements recorded under Section 180 & 183 B.N.S.S. has made specific allegation of rape against the applicant. The victim is minor girl of 17 years of age. The applicant has committed heinous offence. The letter relied upon by the applicant is not the part of case diary, hence, it cannot be examined at this stage. There is active participation of the applicant in the commission of offence, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. 7. Keeping in view submissions of learned counsel for the parties, gravity of offence, nature of allegations and all the attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, no case for bail is made out. 8. Accordingly, the bail application of applicant-Sanjeev Kumar Alias Chhanga, is rejected. October 8, 2025 Mustaqeem. BAIL No. 32938 of 2025 2 (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad