HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28660 of 2025 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Anees Baig, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the first informant, Sri V.D. Ojha, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record. 3. This bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed by the applicant-Muhammad Naseem, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.190 of 2025, u/s 69, 115(2), 352, 351(2) BNS, P.S. Ganjdundwara, District Kasganj. 4. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 18.5.2025 by the victim against the applicant and five other persons alleging therein that the applicant used to love her and on a false promise to marry established physical relationship with her many times. His mother Ruksana told her not to tell it in her house and she would get her married to the applicant. When the mother of the victim came to know, she went to the house of the accused for talking about the relationship on which the accused persons refused marriage and abused her mother and assaulted her. She is aged about 20 years. 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 argued that the victim in her statement under Section 180 BNSS states of talking with the applicant since last three years and physical relationship was established between them. The Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anees Baig Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Anil Kumar, G.A. Muhammad Naseem .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) victim further in her statement under Section 183 BNSS states that she became pregnant and the applicant gave her some medicine due to which the said pregnancy was aborted. While placing para nos.17, 18, 19 and 21 of the affidavit in support of bail application, it has been submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated due to enmity, the FIR has been lodged after taking legal advise, there is no explanation of the delay in lodging of the FIR, there is no independent witness to support the prosecution story and there is general allegation and further that there was discussion of marriage between the two families and when the applicant came to know about the character of the victim in the village, he refused to marry her and then just to pressurize for marriage, he has been falsely implicated. The present case is a case of false implication. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history as stated in para 22 of the affidavit and is in jail since 19.5.2025. 6. Per contra learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the prosecution story is consistent in so far as it relates to the relationship between the applicant and the victim is concerned. There is no reason given by the applicant for his false implication. Even the averments in para nos17, 18, 19 and 21 of the affidavit are false and without any substance which do not in any manner show as to why the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case, 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 applicant is named in the FIR and in the statements of the victim recorded during investigation. The case of the victim is consistent of the applicant committing sexual assault on her. The applicant pleads false implication. No credible and substantial reason has been given by him for false implication. 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. September 9, 2025 Gaurav Kuls BAIL No. 28660 of 2025 2 (Samit Gopal,J.) Digitally signed by :- GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad