Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:48951 Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7546 of 2025 Applicant :- Afsar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rizwan Ullah Siddiqui Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manoj Kumar Mishra,Tanu Shree Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Rizwan Ullah Siddiqui, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pradeep Kumar Kashyap holding brief of Sri Manoj Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the first informant/opposite party no.2, Sri Ajay Singh, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the material on record. 3. Learned counsel for the first informant states that he has filed his vakalatnama in the office but the same is not on record. Office is directed to trace out the same and place it on record by the next date and make a note in the order sheet regarding the same. 4. Sri Shivam Agarwal holding brief of Ms. Tanu Shree appears on behalf of High Court Legal Service Committee/opposite party no.4. 5. This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant-Afsar, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.593 of 2024, u/s 64(1), 103(1), 124(1) of B.N.S. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Deoband, District Saharanpur. 6. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 20.10.2024 by Taufeeq against the applicant, Ajra and Naseem Kuda on the basis of an application moved under Section 173(4) B.N.S.S. alleging therein that his daughter is a minor. Accused Afsar is the son of his brother-in-law (Sardu) who used to visit his house. About two and half months before Afsar asked that his daughter be sent with him so that she may live for some days in his house. He was having an evil eye on her. Afsar along with other co-accused persons used to give some intoxicating tablets to his daughter after which Afsar used to commit rape on his daughter. His daughter opposed the same and requested them to drop her back to the house after which on 9.8.2024 with the intention to kill her and to conceal the actual facts they forcibly made her to drink acid due to which his daughter became seriously ill. She wrote a note and sent it on the Whatsapp to him then he along with his family members reached there to take back his daughter where his daughter was in precarious condition. He talked to accused persons who became annoyed and indulged in scuffle with them. His daughter was taken to the hospital for treatment from where she was referred to Guru Teg Bahadur Hospital, Delhi where she died. 7. During investigation the statement of victim was recorded under Section 180 and 183 B.N.S.S. The Postmortem of the deceased was conducted in which the doctor found the following injuries:- "1. There is no mark of any external injury seen all over body. 2. Oprated case, no stitches present after laprotomy, burst abdomen, covered with vaccum plastic dressing 3. Cachexia type body, abdomenal wall opened (after laprotomy)." 8. The cause of death was opined asphyxia with septisemic shock due to respiratory failure with old history of ingestion of unknown substance and operation. 9. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that as a matter of fact the victim/deceased was having love-affair with the applicant which was one sided affair and when the family members of the victim came to know they gave her some intoxicating substance and have falsely implicated the applicant and his family members. It is argued that the applicant has not committed any rape upon the victim. It is argued that the applicant is the relative of the first informant and since the victim was having one sided love-affair with the applicant, the applicant has been falsely implicated. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history as stated in para 23 of the affidavit and is in jail since 9.1.2024. 10. Per contra learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant is named in the FIR and there are serious allegations against him. The applicant took the deceased to his house and committed rape upon her and then she was administered acid after which she died. The victim in her statements under Section 180 and 183 B.N.S.S. has corroborated the prosecution version and has stated that the applicant was involved in committing rape upon her and then administered acid as such bail application of the applicant be rejected. 11. After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is named in the FIR. There is an allegation of rape and implication of the applicant therein is on the basis of statements of the victim. The victim is a minor. The victim has named the applicant during investigation. The matter is serious in nature. 12. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, gravity of incident and nature of incident, I do not find it a fit case for bail, hence, the bail application is rejected. (Samit Gopal, J.) Order Date :- 5.4.2025 Gaurav Kuls Digitally signed by :- GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad