after examination of the victim. On medical examination, it was detected that the victim has sustained some injuries on her body. However, there is no confirmation with regard to any sexual assault like the gang rape on the victim. A copy of the medical examination report has also been annexed to the bail application as Annexure-3. On perusal of the medical report, it is seen that no injury was found on her private part. Mr. Panda further submitted that the present case is the counterblast to the Gaisilat P.S. Case No.116 of 2021 registered under Section 363 of I.P.C. along with other family members wherein it is alleged that daughter of one Thurli Sahu, namely, Nandini Sahu has been abducted by the son of the Informant, namely, Prashanta Kumbhar. Since there was a caste problem between the two groups, i.e., the girl belonging to general caste and the boy belonging to SC community, the accused persons asked the Informant about the incident and further enquired about the whereabouts of Nandini Sahu, as a result of which, the Informant and her family members apprehending danger from the villagers has foisted a false case implicating all the villagers in the alleged crime. Mr. Panda further submitted that on perusal of the materials placed on record, it cannot be said that there was any sexual assault on the victim. As the son of the Informant had eloped with the daughter of one Thurli Sahu, the Informant to save herself and her son has lodged this false case implicating the present Appellant and others. He further submitted that the Appellant does have any criminal antecedent and he is a resident of locality and having his own house. Therefore, there is no chance of absconding from justice in the event release on bail by this Court. Mr. Panda further submitted that some of the co-accused persons have already been released on bail
