ORDER :

1. The present bail application has been maintained by the petitioner, under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for grant of bail in case FIR No. 09/2021, dated 19.02.2021, under Sections 363, 366A and 376 of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act, registered at Police Station Sangla, District Kinnaur, H.P.

2. As per the averments made in the petition, the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Further, he is neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice. No fruitful purpose will be served by keeping him behind the bars for an unlimited period, so he be released on bail.

3. Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution story, on 07.12.2020, the prosecutrix (name withheld) had gone to the inlaws’ house of her elder sister at Brua, wherefrom, she came back to her house on 10.12.2020. On 18.02.2021, the father of the prosecutrix came to know that when his daughter was at brua, the accused took her to his house, where he has committed sexual intercourse with her and in the morning hours dropped her back. On the basis of the complaint made by the complainant, initially, FIR No. 09/2021, dated 19.02.2021, under Section 376 IPC and Section 4 of POCSO Act, came be registered against the petitioner. However, during investigation, Sections 363, 366A IPC and Section 6 (in place of Section 4) of POCSO Act, were incorporated. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed, as the petitioner was found involved in a heinous crime and there is possibility that in case, at this stage, he is enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and also flee from justice.

4. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Advocate General for the State and gone through the record, including the police report(s), carefully.

5. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is innocent and has been implicated in this case. He has further argued that the petitioner and the prosecutrix are known to each other and having love affair. He argued that the petitioner is neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice and no fruitful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an unlimited period. He has argued that keeping in view the material, which has come on record, and also the age of the petitioner, the bail application be allowed. Conversely, the learned Additional Advocate General has argued that the petitioner was found involved in a heinous offence, so at this stage, in case he is enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice. He has prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed.

6. At this stage, considering the age of the petitioner, i.e. 21 years, the fact that the petitioner and the prosecutrix are known to each other, the relationship inter se parties, the manner in which the offence is alleged to have occurred, the fact that the petitioner is behind the bars for more than six months, the fact that the petitioner is neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by the conditions of bail, if granted. So considering the overall facts, which have come on record, and without discussing them at this stage and also the fact that the petitioner cannot be kept behind the bars for an unlimited period, this Court finds that the present is a fit case where the judicial discretion to admit the petitioner on bail is required to be exercised in his favour. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and it is ordered that the petitioner, who has been arrested by the police, in case FIR No. 09/2021, dated 19.02.2021, under Sections 363, 366A and 376 of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act, registered at Police Station Sangla, Distric