Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:108677 Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23693 of 2025 Applicant :- Raghvendra Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Kumar Sharma,Sunil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Raj Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajay Singh, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the material on record. 3. This bail application under Section 483 of BNSS has been filed by the applicant-Raghvendra Yadav, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.36 of 2025, under Sections 333, 64(1), 115(2), 352, 351(2) B.N.S., registered at Police Station Sadh, District Kanpur Nagar. 4. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 4.3.2025 by the victim against the applicant alleging therein that her husband does private job in district Sonipat. On 2.3.2005 at about 7 p.m. she heard the sound of opening the almirah on which she came from her general merchant store inside the house and saw the applicant collecting the gold and silver ornaments on which she tried to snatch it on which he threw her on the floor and committed rape on her. In the said incident, she received injuries on her body. At that time her family members had gone in a marriage ceremony which was going on nearby. The accused has taken away her mobile phone and jewellery of gold and silver with him. After return of her in- laws, she told them about the incident and then FIR has been lodged. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the medical examination of the victim although shows an abrasion mark on the left side of dorsum of hand but the same is small and simple injury. The victim has not received any injury on her private part. The allegation regarding the applicant taking away the jewellery from the house is false and incorrect as he has been exonerated by the police during investigation in so far as the said allegation is concerned. It is submitted that the victim has not received any injury with regards to any sexual violence on her private part. While placing para nos.12 and 19 of the affidavit in support of bail application, it is submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter due to ulterior motive. The first informant was familiar to the applicant and had taken Rs.45,000/- from him and when the said money was demanded back by the applicant, he has been falsely implicated in the present case. While placing para no.2 of the supplementary affidavit dated 3.7.2025, it is submitted that the applicant was previously involved in one criminal case but in the said case, final report has been submitted on 12.5.2025. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history as stated in para 17 of the affidavit and is in jail since 6.4.2025. 6. Per contra learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and argued that in so far as the allegation of rape against the applicant on the victim is concerned, the same is consistent throughout as it finds place in the FIR and both the statements of the victim. Even the victim was found to have received an injury on her hand which was found by the doctor during medical examination. The case of the applicant is of false implication which is false since the victim has consistently stated of the applicant committing rape upon her. Charge sheet in the matter has been submitted for offence under Sections 333, 64(1), 115(2), 352, 351(2) BNS. There is credible evidence against the applicant. The applicant is named in the FIR and in both the statements of the victim recorded during investigation. The case of the applicant is of denial. The bail application of the applicant be thus rejected. 7. After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is named in the FIR and in both the statements of the victim recorded during investigation. There is consistent allegation of rape being committed by the applicant upon the victim. The victim has received injury on her body which has been found in the medical examination. The case of the applicant is of denial. The charge sheet in the matter has been submitted. 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. (Samit Gopal, J.) Order Date :- 9.7.2025/Gaurav Kuls Digitally signed by :- GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad