Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:42006 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9561 of 2024 Applicant :- Sheelendra Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh,Bhaskar Bhadra,Pavan Kumar,Praveen Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. Supplementary affidavit filed today by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Utkarsh Shukla, Advocate holding brief of Sri Pavan Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ashutosh Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 321 of 2023, under Sections 354A, 354B, 376, 506 of I.P.C., Police Station - Sirauli, District - Bareilly, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant, who is in inebriated stage, is stated to have taken the deaf and dumb daughter of the informant to a vacant house on 12.11.2023 at about 09:00 PM and had committed rape with her and even torn her 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 15 hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel has also stated that the victim is major aged about 19 years. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. Even the FSL report does not corroborate the prosecution story. The allegations of outraging the modesty have been escalated to rape in the statement of the victim. 7. 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 04.12.2023. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the victim was deaf and dumb girl, as such, could not raise alarm and was overpowered by the applicant in an inebriated stage. the prosecution story stands established by the statement of the witnesses i.e. PW-1 & 2, who are the informant and the sister of the victim, respectively, 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 was deaf and dumb girl and she was struggled and tried to save herself thereby her clothes were also torn during scuffle, 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:- 21.3.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad