Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:29952 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7429 of 2025 Applicant :- Sokinder Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sachin Malik Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. As informed by learned A.G.A., notice has been served to the informant on 23.2.2025. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Pranshu Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 22 of 2024, U/S 376- AB, 452 IPC and 5m/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Baleni, District Baghpat, during the pendency of trial. PROSECUTION STORY: 4. The applicant is stated to have committed rape with the 8-year old daughter of the informant on 16.2.2024 at about 5.00 pm. 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. It is stated that he has nothing to do with the said offence. 6. The FIR is delayed by about three hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 7. There is no external injury observed by the doctor conducting her medical examination, although there are minor internal injuries observed. The applicant is not the resident of the village of the informant. Rather, his relative, Amit S/o Kishori, reside just opposite to the house of the victim and they had an altercation. The applicant has been falsely implicated owing to the altercation between the two. 8. The applicant is languishing in jail since 18.2.2024 having no criminal history and in case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF STATE/OPPOSITE PARTY: 9. The bail application has been opposed on the ground that the victim was of tender age i.e. 8 years and she has sustained injuries on her vital part. It is stated that the doctor has observed tear and bleeding. In addition to it, swelling was also observed, as such, the applicant is not entitled for bail. CONCLUSION: 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, the age of the victim coupled by the injuries sustained by her, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 11. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected. 12. 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. 13. 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 :- 4.3.2025 Shalini (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad