1. - The present bail application has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with FIR No. 110/2011, registered at Police Station Asind, Distt. Bhilwara for the offences under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and Section 3(1)(XII) of the SC/ST Act.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in this case, the prosecutrix Mst. "S", who is the daughter of Bheru Lal had gone missing on 15.04.2011. The missing person report No. 4/2011 was registered at the Police Station Asind at the instance of Bheru Lal and the investigation on the said report was being done by one Chand Singh, Head Constable. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner was called in connection with the said missing person report and was being tried to be implicated as an accused for abducting the girl. In the meantime, the girl Mst. "S" was recovered on 03.06.2011 and her statement was recorded in connection with the aforesaid missing person report, in which, she stated that she had gone voluntarily with Nand Lal, a person whom she knew from before. In the said statement, she has also stated that she entered into an agreement with Nand Lal at the court premises at Bhilwara and then went with Nand Lal to Shirdi as well as Vaishno Devi. She clearly admitted her consensual relations with Nand Lal but denied any allegation of physical contact. Accordingly, Bheru Lal submitted an application to the SHO, Police Station Asind on 3rd June, 2011 that he did not desire to pursue the missing person report about his daughter having gone missing. The affidavit of the prosecutrix was also submitted on that day, in which, she has sworn that nobody had abducted her.

3. Learned counsel further submits that thereafter, the Investigating Officer namely Chand Singh started harassing the petitioner and also started demanding bribe from the petitioner, on which, the petitioner got him trapped by the Anti Corruption Bureau, Bhilwara while taking bribe of Rs. 10,000/- on 6th June, 2011. It is submitted that thereafter the aforesaid Chand Singh instigated Bheru Lal to file a false report against the petitioner and Nand Lal, on which, Bheru Lal submitted a complaint against the petitioner and Nand Lal with the allegation that the petitioner was responsible for committing rape upon his daughter along with co-accused Nand Lal. It has been further submitted that it is totally on account of the pressure of the aforesaid Chand Singh that the present FIR has been registered and the petitioner is being sought to be arrested in this case. Learned counsel further submits that ex facie the ingredients of the offence under Section 3(1 )(XII) of the SC/ST Act are not made out in the present case as it is not the case of the prosecutrix that the petitioner committed the act of rape upon the prosecutrix because she was a member of scheduled caste/tribe.

4. It has also been submitted that the petitioner has already appeared before the Investigating Officer. Learned counsel further submits that co-accused Nand Lal was arrested in this case and he in his investigation has stated that he was having affair with the prosecutrix since long and that the petitioner had simply helped him to execute the documents of marriage with the prosecutrix. Thereafter, it is only co-accused Nand Lal, who had gone with the prosecutrix to various places and thus it is prayed there is no justification for the petitioners arrest in this case.

5. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application.

6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties, perused the order impugned as well as the case diaries of FIR No. 110/2011 and the FIR No. 210/2011, which has been registered against Chand Singh, the Investigating Officer for having taken bribe from the petitioner and have given thoughtful consideration to the arguments advanced at bar.In the investigation file of the A.C.B., the record of the missing person report is also annexed. In the said record, the s