Cr.MP(M) No. 58 of 2010 26.2.2010 Present: Mr. M.S. Guleria, counsel for the petitioner. Mr. J.S. Rana, Assistant Advocate General, for the respondent. Police report filed. The petitioner was arrested for committing the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code in terms of FIR No. 224 of 2009, dated 8.8.2009, registered in Police Station, Sundernagar. He failed to get the bail from the Court of Sessions, as such, approached this court under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The challan has been presented in the Court and is now fixed for 19.3.2010. Precisely, the case of the prosecution is that the prosecutrix, aged around 17 years of age had developed the intimacy with the petitioner, who was working in the adjoining village. On 5th of August, 2009 she went to Sundernagar where the petitioner happened to meet her. It is alleged that the petitioner insisted upon her to accompany and proposed to marry. She was reluctant and informed him that she was already engaged with some other boy, therefore, she would not be able to accept his proposal, but despite that he compelled her to accompany him and took her to Chandigarh where they stayed in the house of his brother-in-law and thereafter stayed at Tanda in the house of his another brother-in-law. In the meantime, the FIR was registered. The prosecutrix was recovered and medically examined. Her statement was recorded. The petitioner was also medically examined. During the investigation of this case the police obtained the school leaving certificate of the prosecutrix wherein she has Cr.MP(M) No. 58 of 2010 been shown more than 16 years. According to the report of ossification her all the parts were fused, therefore, she was opined to be more than 17 years. As per the statement of the father of the prosecutrix she was 17 years at the time of the alleged incident. Keeping in view the fact that the prosecution prima-facie was little below the age of the discretion and also that she had visited various places and there is no allegation of threatening from the petitioner not to disclose the facts also that she was compelled to accompany him. She also happened to meet many people at various places but did not complain to any one. Therefore, from facts at this stage it is a fit case to grant the bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the bail petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his entering into the bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount, out of which one should be local surety, to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mandi and this bail shall be subject to the following conditions that the petitioner:- (i) shall present in the court of Additional Sessions Judge Mandi on 19.3.2010 on which date the case is fixed for consideration of charge and thereafter as and when called upon to do so. (ii) shall not make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of this case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or the Police. (iii) shall not involve in any criminal activity in future. Needless to say if the petitioner makes breach of any of the aforesaid condition, the liberty of the bail shall be cancelled. Cr.MP(M) No. 58 of 2010 Any observation made hereinabove is strictly for the disposal of this bail petition and shall not affect the merits of the case in any way and the learned trial court shall decide the matter without having been influence the observation made hereinabove. A copy of this order be sent to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mandi forthwith. In case, the urgent copy is applied by any of the parties to be supplied them immediately as per rules. The application stands disposed of. (Surinder Singh), J. 26th February, 2010 (vs)