petitioner pulled her and closed the door and committed rape with her and in that FIR, she also stated that she was threatened by the accused-petitioner whereas, petitioner called the father of the prosecutrix and stated that her daughter called him and as per her call she was kidnapped by someone; on the contrary of these statements, during the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she stated that her mother sent her to market for the purchase of goods whereas, as per the FIR, she was sent by her mother and, if she was sent by her mother how she can believe this fact narrated by accused-petitioner that her mother is cleaning house situated nearby market. Learned counsel further stated that father of the prosecutrix worked as driver of bus owned by the accused-petitioner and due to some dispute of outstanding, accused-petitioner falsely implicated in this case. In fact, accused-petitioner found prosecutrix nearby to the fields of Sawai Singh Temple of Ramdevra with some other person and informed the father of the prosecutrix in this regard and this fact is admitted by prosecutrix in the FIR and accused petitioner was implicated in this case. Learned counsel further stated that as per medical report, there is no injury on any part of the body of the prosecutrix and her hymen was old torned. With these submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that benefit of bail may be granted to the petitioner.
