HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21334 of 2025 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Varun Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shardool Agrahari, learned counsel for the first informant/opposite party no. 2, Sri V.D. Ojha, learned A.G.A. for the State/opposite party no. 1 and perused the material on record. 3. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant Himanshu, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with F.I.R. No.0298 of 2025, Dated 15.05.2025, under Sections 65(1), 61(2), 351(2) B.N.S. and 3/4(2) POCSO Act, 67 IT Act, registered at P.S. Firozabad North,District- Firozabad. 4. The F.I.R. of the matter was lodged on 15.5.2025 by Smt. Jyoti Sharma against the applicant and Babli Chauhan alleging therein that daughter of her sister aged about 14 years was living with her and studying. She used to talk to a boy named Himanshu. On 12.5.2025 Himanshu allured her on phone and called her to his office. He finding her there alone enraged her modesty. The informant followed the victim and reached there and somehow got her released. The applicant threatened her of not making a complaint and stated that husband of Babli is in jail and is a criminal and if she informs the police about it, he would get her murdered through him. Her financial condition is not good and looking to the same, Himanshu had stated of giving service to the victim in an automobile showroom where he had stated that he is working in partnership with Babli Chauhan. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Varun Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Shardool Agrahari Himanshu .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) On 11.5.2025 in the evening he called them to showroom and introduced them to Babli Chauhan. Babli then told the victim to go with Himanshu at a different office. Himanshu has sent dirty message on Whatsapp of the victim. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that as per the First Information Report the present case is only of enraging modesty of the victim by the applicant. It is submitted that the victim in her statement recorded during investigation under Section 180 B.N.S.S. reiterated the version of the F.I.R. It is submitted that subsequently the victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S. levelled allegations of sexual assault on her by stating that Himanshu inserted his hand in her private parts and also inappropriately touched her chest. It is submitted that the same is an afterthought just in order to give the case a different colour. It is submitted that charge sheet dated 09.7.2025 in the matter has been submitted against the applicant, copy of the same has been annexed along with rejoinder affidavit dated 7.8.2025. It is submitted that the applicant is having no criminal history as stated in para 30 of the affidavit and is in jail since 16.5.2025. 6. Per contra, learned AGA and learned counsel for the first informant opposed the prayer for bail vehemently and submitted that the victim as per the F.I.R. is aged about 14 years and as per school records also, she is aged about 13 years and 5 month. It is submitted that in so far as the present incident is concerned, there is no chance of false implication and also misidentification of the accused/applicant. 7. Learned A.G.A. further submits that during investigation 74 photographs have been recovered by the Investigating Officer which are part of the case diary and thus charge sheet has been submitted under the provisions of I.T. Act also apart from the other offences. It is submitted that the applicant is named in the F.I.R. and in the statements of the victim recorded during investigation. 8. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the victim is a minor girl. The applicant is named in the F.I.R. and also in the statements of the victim recorded during investigation. Photographs have been made part of the case diary. The prosecution under the Information Technology Act has also charged against BAIL No. 21334 of 2025 2 the applicant. 9. 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. 10. The bail application is, accordingly, rejected. September 10, 2025 Naresh BAIL No. 21334 of 2025 3 (Samit Gopal,J.) Digitally signed by :- NARESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad