Having heard the leaned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State, upon perusal of material brought on record, evidence, complicity of the accused, nature and gravity of offence, accusation made and coupled with the fact that even though the F.I.R. is not an encyclopedia of the prosecution but it must disclose the basic prosecution case, the prosecutrix in her statements has departed from the basic prosecution case for which no explanation has been offered, the police report under Section 173 (2) CrPC having been submitted, therefore the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against the applicant now stands crystalized, no such circumstance could be pointed out by the learned A.G.A. necessitating the custodial arrest of the applicant during the course of trial, the enmity between the parties as noted above, the judgement of Supreme Court in Sumit Subhashchandra Gangwal (supra) , the statements of the prosecutrix when examined as a whole are inconsistent and contradictory, therefore do not fall in the category of impeccable evidence, the clean antecedents of the applicant, the period of incarceration undergone, but without making
