12.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 in the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence and considering the fact that there are contradictions in the statement of victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. and the version of the F.I.R., she has not made any allegation of rape against the appellant in the F.I.R. but she took somersault in the statement recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., wherein, allegation of rape was leveled and after perusal of the medical report, as the doctor in his opinion has opined that no internal or external injury was found on the person of the prosecutrix and her age was found to be 19 years and further considering that the similarly circumstanced and identically placed co-accused, Pradeep has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 03.08.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 3244 of 2022 and considering that 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 UP and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, this Court is of the view that the learned court below has failed to appreciate the material available on record. The order passed by the court below is liable to be set aside.
