After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the Bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, considering the fact that there are vast contradictions in the statements of the victim recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. as well as in the F.I.R.; the medical report of the victim does not support allegation of rape as doctor has given his opinion that neither any external or internal injury was found on the private parts of the victim, nor any dead or alive spermatozoa was seen on her vaginal smear; similarly circumstanced co-accused, Ramesh Singh, has already been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court and the case of the applicant is not on the worse footing than that of the aforesaid co-accused who has been enlarged on bail; as well as considering the larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another , reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.
