Rule. Learned A.P.P., waives service of notice of Rule for respondent-State.

2. This application is filed under Sec. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with first information report registered on 3-3-2011 vide CR. No. 1-16 of 2010 with Bagodara Police Station, for the offences alleged to have taken place 12 months before and punishable under Sees. 376, 365, 344, 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Brief facts of this case are as under :

That the marriage of the complainant aged about 19 years with Mahesh Bhopabhai Koli Patel was solemnized as per Hindu customary rituals an 31-3-2009 at Ahmedabad in the marriage ceremony performed at Shiv Marriage Point Hall. The complainant and her husband had given an advertisement in the newspaper about their marriage. The relevant documents namely marriage certificate and the advertisement published in the newspaper have been annexed with this application. Even an affidavit sworn by the complainant that she had left her husband and without taking valuable articles dated 31-3-2009 is also on record of this case.

4. The complainant herself filed a complaint against her relatives and requested for protection from her family members at Bagodara Police Station on 14-4-2009, in which, it was stated that she received threats from her relatives. In the above complaint, it was stated by her that she had left her parental place voluntarily and had no grievance with her husband pursuant to the registration of marriage before the Registrar of Marriages.

5. For the offences alleged to have taken place before one year or so a complaint came to be filed on 3-3-2010 against one Prabhat Makwana and other three persons and the applicant herein is accused No.2. According to the complainant she was taken by accused No. 1 to various places and at initial stage the accused herein had abetted the crime. However, according to her, she got married with one Mahesh Bhopabhai Koli Patel, who later on expired and Prabhat Makwana, accused No. 1 threatened her with dire consequences and had administered threat to her life, she lodged complaint after so many months. However, fact remains that there are no direct allegations against the present applicant of commission of crimes punishable under Sec. 376 read with Sec. 114 of the I.P.C.

6. Learned Counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant is falsely implicated and no overt act is attributed to him. All allegations are against one Prabhat Makwana and two co-accused Shri Mahesh Valjibhai Barevadia, (Parchanwala) was granted anticipatory bail in exercise of powers under Sec. 438 of the Cr. P.C., 1973 by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court as per order dated 5-8-2010 passed in Misc.Cri.A. No. 8237 of 2010 (Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Z. K. Saiyed) and Ajitbhai B. Dodiya was enlarged on regular bail in exercise of powers under Sec. 439 of the Code vide order dated 13-8-2010 in Misc.Cri.A. No. 9316 of 2010 (Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Z. K. Saiyed). It is, therefore, submitted that the applicant herein against whom also similar allegations have been levelled in a belated complaint filed after about more than 12 months and when the version of the complainant taken as a whole is unbelievable, who got married with one Mahesh Bhopabhai Koli Patel travelled and stayed together, the marriage was solemnized, certificate of marriage was produced, a declaration on oath was made and even an advertisement in the newspaper was also given, in such circumstances, order rejecting the' application of the applicant for regular bail by the learned trial Judge (learned Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad Rural) deserves to be quashed and set aside. Learned Counsel further submits that in spite of the above two orders granting anticipatory and regular bail to the co-accused by the High Court were produced on the record of the trial Court and an application for bail which was preferred after filing of the charge-sheet came to be rejected by not accepting