HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25075 of 2024 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ram Prakash Shukla, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record. 3. This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant-Anoop, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.473 of 2019, u/s 376-D, 506 IPC, Section 3/4 POCSO Act, and Section 67A I.T. Act, P.S. Pipraich, District Gorakhpur. 4. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 16.9.2019 by Ramesh Vishwakarma against the applicant and Ashok Sahani alleging therein that on 11.9.2019 at about 11 p.m. when his daughter aged about 16 years had gone to ease herself, the accused persons finding her alone, gagged her mouth and took her to a lonely house of Sikandar where Anoop (the present applicant) committed rape upon her and co-accused Ashok Sahani made a video of the same. Both the accused persons threatened her of not telling it to anyone otherwise they would share the video to others. 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 further argued that the victim was examined before the trial court as P.W.1 who although in her examination- Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Anoop .....Applicant(s) State Of Up And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) in-chief supported the prosecution case but in her cross-examination has not supported the prosecution case, copy of the said statement has been placed before the Court as annexure no.7 to the affidavit in support of bail application and looking to the same, there is no credible evidence against the applicant. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history as stated in para 23 of the affidavit and is in jail since 17.9.2019. 6. Per contra learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and argued that as per certificate of the C.M.O concerned, the victim is aged about 14 years. The examination-in-chief of the victim was recorded on 25.11.2020 in which she has supported the prosecution case in full. Subsequently on 5.1.2021 when she was cross-examined, she states a different version. The same is for the trial court to appreciate at the appropriate stage. Even otherwise the same would go to show that there has been tempering of evidence by the accused persons as such bail application of the applicant be rejected. 7. After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the victim is a minor girl aged about 14 years. The applicant is named in the FIR. The victim was examined before the trial court as P.W.1 who during her examination-in-chief recorded on 25.11.2020 has supported the prosecution case in full and has levelled the allegation of rape against the applicant. Subsequently on 5.1.2021 when she was cross-examined, she states a different version. It is for the trial court to appreciate at the appropriate stage. 8. 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. 9. However, it is provided that the applicant may file an application for expeditious disposal of the trial of the case before the court concerned, which may as per its load of work, diary and pendency of cases, pass appropriate orders on the same. September 12, 2025 Gaurav Kuls BAIL No. 25075 of 2024 2 (Samit Gopal,J.) Digitally signed by :- GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad