Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:109792 Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17796 of 2025 Applicant :- Bhupendra Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Krishna Yadav,Subhash Chandra Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sunita Singh Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Ram Krishna Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Sunita Singh, learned counsel for the first informant, Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. 3. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant Bhupendra Singh, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.46 of 2025, under Sections 65(1), 352(2) B.N.S. and Section 3/4(2) Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, registered at P.S. Kotwali Kalpi, District Jalaun. 4. The F.I.R. of the matter was lodged on 27.2.2025 by the victim against the applicant alleging therein that she is aged about 14 years. On 26.2.2025 at about 03:30 p.m. she had gone to the field to bring fodder where the applicant caught her hand and pulled her inside mustard field and committed rape upon her. She raised a shout on which her chachi working in adjacent field, came there and exhorted on which the applicant ran away by extending threat and she then came to the house and told about the incident to her parents and other family members. A report be lodged and action be taken. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 23.5.2025 directed for ossification test of the victim to be conducted by C.M.O. concerned which has been done and a report has been sent to this Court. It is submitted that the victim although reiterates the allegation of rape in her statement recorded during investigation but her statement contains conflicting versions inasmuch as it relates to the person reaching the place of occurrence immediately on her shout. It is submitted that as such the prosecution version is not consistent. It is further submitted that initially the victim has stated that she is not literate but later on records of the school were made part of the case diary. It is submitted while placing para no. 15 of the affidavit that a N.C.R. No. 170 of 2018, under Section 323, 504 I.P.C. was lodged on 16.12.2018 by the family member of the applicant against the family members of the first informant due to which the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the applicant is having no criminal history as stated in para-21 of the affidavit and is in jail since 01.3.2025. 6. Per contra, learned AGA and learned counsel for the first informant/opposite party no. 4 opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the victim is aged about 12 years 09 months and 19 days as per school records wherein her date of birth is mentioned as 07.5.2012 and as such she is a minor. It is submitted that the victim has stated about the applicant committing rape upon her in the F.I.R. and the statements recorded during investigation. It is submitted that the averment in para-15 of the affidavit regarding reason for false implication is a stale ground since the said N.C.R. was lodged around 07 years back and thus there was no occasion for the applicant to be falsely implicated now. 7. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the applicant is named in the F.I.R. and in the statements of the victim recorded during investigation. School records of the victim show her date of birth as 07.5.2012 and as such she is aged about 12 years 09 months and 19 days. In so far as ossification test and its report is concerned although the same is in sealed cover in the records but since there is school records giving date of birth of the victim, the ossification examination is secondary. The reasons as pleaded in para-15 of the affidavit is too old and stale. 8. Looking into the facts and circumstances of the case as well as nature and gravity of the offence, I am not inclined to release the applicant on bail. 9. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected. (Samit Gopal,J.) Order Date :- 10.7.2025/Naresh Digitally signed by :- NARESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad