Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:85822 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9120 of 2025 Applicant :- Mahtab Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Afzal Ansari,Mohd. Khalil Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Mohd. Khalil, learned counsel for applicant, Sri Amit Kumar, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.280 of 2024, under Sections 65(2), 137(2) B.N.S. and Section 5M/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Nai Mandi, District Muzaffarnagar with the prayer to enlarge him on bail. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have taken the daughter of the victim aged about 9 years behind his house by enticing her away who was of unsound mind and had disrobed her and committed rape with her on 01.07.2024 at about 12:50 p.m. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the FIR is delayed by about ten hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. There are two eye-witnesses of the incident and they have given inconsistent statement to each other, as such, they cannot be relied upon. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. The victim has not sustained any injury whatsoever on her body. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that it is true that the victim was minor aged about 10-11 years as per ossification test report, whereby she has stated that the applicant disrobed himself after disrobing her and lay down over her and she observed pain on her back. The said allegations are per se false, as such, the applicant is entitled for bail. He is in jail since 03.07.2024 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. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed much reliance on the judgment of this Court passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.3531 of 2025 (Akash Alias Chhotu vs. State of U.P.) on 5.5.2025. 8. Per contra, learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the victim is 10- 11 years old and a swelling was observed on the right wrist joint of the victim by the doctor conducting her medical examination. He has further stated that the victim was a girl of unsound mind, as such, the applicant is not entitled for bail. 9. The facts and circumstances of the case referred by the counsel for the applicant do not match to the instant case. 10. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the FIR was instituted the same day of offence and the victim had sustained injury on her wrist coupled with the fact that the victim is 10-11 years old only and is of unsound mind and also that the facts and circumstances of the case relied by the counsel for the applicant are not pari- materia to the instant case, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. 11. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected. 12. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously as early as possible in view of the principle as has been laid down in the recent judgments 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 :- 21.5.2025 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad