stated in her statement recorded under Section 161 CrPC that she went away with the petitioner out of her own free will and volition whereas in her statement recorded under Section 164 CrPC, she has stated that she was taken away forcefully; secondly, she has also stated in her statement made to the police u/s 161 that she was raped once and contrary to this, she has stated in her statement made to the magistrate u/s 164 that she was raped multiple times by the petitioner. More pertinently, she wrote to the Superintendent of Police, Sirohi urging therein that she was being forced by her family to marry with one Dinesh from whom they had borrowed certain amount of money in exchange of which she was betrothed to him when she was a child and rather it was Dinesh who had raped her. She also admitted in her statements that she used to talk to the petitioner using a mobile from the past more than six months. Though the plea of age has not been raised but the same as well as the genuineness of the allegations are issues to be adjudged after appreciation of evidence during trial and therefore, it is made clear that the above observations shall not influence the trial judge in any manner while presiding over the matter. Thus, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, it is deemed suitable to grant the benefit of bail to the petitioner in the present matter.
