JUDGMENT

1. This is the first bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 filed on behalf of the applicant for grant of bail. The applicant is in custody since 27/06/2022 in connection with Crime No.1037/2022 registered at Police Station - Banganga, District Indore (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Section 376(2)(N), 294 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. As per prosecution story, a written complaint was filed by the prosecutrix on 26/06/2022 alleging that she works as a beautician and know the present applicant as she used to live in the same colony for last twelve years. They were in touch telephonically a applicant used to visit her house. When the prosecutrix was alone at her house, the applicant sexually harassed her without her consent. When the prosecutrix threatened the applicant to lodge a report, he gave a promise to the prosecutrix to get marry with her.

3. On this pretext also, applicant committed sexual intercourse many times and after June, 2022 applicant refused to get marry with the prosecutrix. Accordingly, an offence has been registered against the applicant.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this offence. He is in custody since 27/06/2022. Prosecutrix is a 30 years old major and matured lady. FIR is lodged about eight months belated without any plausible explanation. It appears to be a case of consent, which on some dispute or some issue between the prosecutrix and applicant has been given a shape of criminal matter.

5. He filed certain documents to show the intimacy of the prosecutrix with the present applicant. Present applicant is the permanent resident of district Indore and final conclusion of the trial is likely to take sufficient long time. Under the above circumstances, prayer for grant of bail may be considered on such terms and conditions, as this Court deems fit and proper.

6. Per contra, learned counsel for the objector/prosecutrix opposes the bail application and prays for its rejection by submitting that the applicant has sexually harassed the prosecutrix and committed rape upon her several times , therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail.

7. Learned counsel for the respondent/State also opposes the bail application and prays for its rejection.

8. Perused the impugned order of the trial Court as well as the case diary.

9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offence, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and also taking note of the fact that the prosecutrix is a 30 years old major and matured lady, it appears that she was living in the company of the applicant for about eight months, FIR is eight months belated without any proper explanation and final conclusion of the trial will take sufficient long time. In these circumstances, I deem it proper to release the applicant on bail. Therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, the application is allowed.

10. It is directed that applicant be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.75,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Thousand Only) with one solvent surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court for his appearance before the trial Court, as and when required. He shall abide by all the conditions enumerated under Section 437(3) Cr.P.C.

11. Certified copy as per rules.