of the victim were recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., in which, she developed the case and stated that about one year ago from the date of lodging of the F.I.R., when she went outside to ease herself, the appellant caught her hand and dragged in a grove and after committing rape forcibly, he ran away. She came to her house in weeping condition and narrated the incident to her parents, on which, her father went to the appellant, but a quarrel took place and the appellant gave beatings to the father of the victim. She also stated that on the next date, Village Panchayat was conducted for resolving the issue, in which, the appellant tendered his apology that he will not repeat the said incident. However, after marriage, he started blackmailing the victim and when the husband of the victim saw the message of the appellant on the mobile phone of the victim, he reported the same to her father and thereafter, the victim was ousted by her husband. Submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that statement of the mother of the victim was also recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., in which, she stated that the incident of rape was conducted 3 years ago from the date of lodging of the F.I.R. It is vehemently submitted that the mobile was not sent to F.S.L. for examination, but without considering these facts, the Investigating OfÏcer filed the charge sheet. It is lastly submitted that the trial court has not considered all these facts while rejecting the bail application and the trial is also not going on. It is, thus, submitted that the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the appellant, who does not have any criminal antecedent and is in jail since 12.07.2023, is entitled for bail. It is also submitted that the appellant is ready to cooperate in the trial.
