Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:116882 Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19599 of 2025 Applicant :- Amrish Prajapati Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vinay Kumar Singh Chandel Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajeev Kumar Saini Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Vinay Kumar Singh Chandel, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajeev Kumar Saini, learned counsel for the first informant, Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record. 3. Vakalatnama of Sri Rajeev Kumar Saini, learned counsel for the first informant is not on record despite his name being printed in the cause list. Office to trace out the same and place it on record and make a note in the order sheet regarding the same. 4. This bail application under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed by the applicant-Amrish Prajapati, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.232 of 2025, u/s 376, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Sahibabad, District Ghaziabad. 5. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 14.4.2025 by the victim against the applicant and four other persons alleging therein that she used to live in Ghaziabad on a rented room and work there. She met the applicant in the year 2022 who then on 12th March offered to marry her. He then came to her house and on a false promise established physical relationship with her. In April, 2024 she told him to marry. The applicant also got her connected to his mother and there was discussion of marriage. Then there was a demand of Rs.5 lakh as dowry. In the meantime she came to know that she has become pregnant. She told the applicant about it on which he forced her to get the the said pregnancy aborted and told her that they would have child after marriage, which on the saying of the applicant was aborted. He then again established physical relationship with her. He has refused to marry her. A report be lodged and action be taken. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant categorically argued that the applicant was in a relationship of friendship with the victim but there was no sexual relationship between the applicant and the victim. He has placed para 33 of the affidavit in support of bail application and submits that in so far as allegation of rape or sexual relationship is concerned, the same is denied. He submits that the allegation of sexual relationship and rape is false and concocted. It is argued that the applicant was a friend of the victim since 2022 and after some confusion, the present FIR has been lodged. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history as stated in para 37 of the affidavit and is in jail since 15.4.2025. 7. Per contra learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the specific case of the victim is of the applicant committing rape upon her repeatedly. She even became pregnant and the said pregnancy was aborted on the saying of the applicant, after the same, the applicant again committed rape upon her. The defence of the applicant that there was no rape or sexual assault on the victim by the applicant is false since the FIR and the version of the victim during investigation specifically state of sexual assault on her, the bail application of the applicant be rejected. 8. After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is named in the and in the statements of the victim recorded during investigation. The allegation therein is of committing rape upon her on a promise to marry which was false. The victim became pregnant which on the saying of the applicant was aborted and then again there was sexual assault on her. The case of the applicant is of false implication and denial of sexual relationship but only friendship was there between them which is stated and argued. There are allegations of sexual assault on the victim by the applicant which is consistent throughout. 9. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find it a fit case for bail, hence, the bail application is rejected. (Samit Gopal, J.) Order Date :- 18.7.2025 Gaurav Kuls Digitally signed by :- GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad