Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:51678 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8962 of 2025 Applicant :- Hardev Verma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ashwani Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sanjay Kumar Dubey Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Ashwani Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sunil Kumar Dubey, Advocate holding brief of Sri Sanjay Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Amit Kumar, learned State Law Officer and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 347 of 2024, under Section 65(1) of I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station - Kotwali, District - Jhansi, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant, who happens to be the step-father of the victim, is stated to have committed rape with her in absence of her mother on 30.10.2024 at about 05:00 PM. The landlord and other persons who lived in the said house, are stated to have saved her after hearing her shrieks. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The truth is that the victim was seen with the son of the landlord in a compromising state by the applicant and he had scolded her and slapped her. Peeved by the said act, she has instituted the instant FIR out of vengeance. The victim by her looks seems to be major although as per ossification test report, her age has come out to be between 13 to 15 years. 6. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. It is further stated that there is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 06.11.2024. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant has stated that the informant i.e. mother of the victim has stated that the applicant has not committed any sexual assault to her daughter. 8. Per contra, learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the FIR is too prompt. The medical examination of the victim was conducted on the very next day of the incident wherein it was found that the victim has sustained injuries on her vital parts i.e. small 03-05 mm superficial perineal tear were present on her vital parts and slight oozing of blood was also found, as such, the applicant is not entitled for bail. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and also taking into consideration the fact that the victim has sustained injuries on her vital parts coupled by the fact that the FIR is prompt, I do not find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. 10. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected. 11. 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. 12. 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:- 9.4.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad