Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:85667 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8440 of 2025 Applicant :- Nagendra @ Yogendra Chauhan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ravesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. Rejoinder affidavit filed today by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Mahendra Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ravesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri R.P. Patel, learned State Law Officer and also perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 193 of 2024, under Sections 64(2)K, 331(2), 351(3), 352 of BNS, Police Station - Marhara, District - Etah, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have been found nude and committing rape with the wife of the informant in the night of 08.11.2024 at about 00:30 hours. The victim is stated to have raised alarm, as such, her daughter is stated to have woken up and found the applicant without clothes, as such, she called other family members, who reached there and the applicant ran away leaving behind his clothes. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. The FIR is delayed by about 19 hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel has also stated that it is a clear cut case of false implication as the victim is the consenting party. There is no sign of any struggle whatsoever. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 10.11.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Per contra, learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the victim had sustained four injuries on her body and the prosecution story stands corroborated from the fact that the memo was prepared regarding the said clothes of the applicant which were left at the house of the victim. It is further stated that the victim is of unsound mind and the applicant had taken advantage of her mental state and committed rape with her. However, it is not disputed that the applicant has no criminal history. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and also considering the fact that the victim, who is of unsound mind, had sustained four injuries on her body coupled by the fact as has been mentioned in the recovery memo about the recovery of clothes of the applicant which were left at the house of the victim, I do not find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail, at this stage. 9. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected. 10. 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. 11. 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:- 21.5.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad