JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned Public Prosecutor. All the three bail applications are related to the same FIR and therefore, are being disposed of by this common order. 2. A case Under Sections 363, 366 & 376 Indian Penal Code is under investigation at P.S. Sridoongargarh, District Churu against the applicants. A report was lodged by Magha Ram s/o Budha Ram Jat, resident of Likhmisar, Churu, father of prosecutrix Mst. Mali on 15.9.1996. The prosecutrix was married about three months back and she had come to her father's house. When Magha Ram came back to his house on 3.9.1996 at about 9.00 p.m. the prosecutrix Mali was not in the house. On enquiry Jetha Ram and Mangu Ram Jat informed him on 4.9.1996 that her daughter was seen talking to Mala Ram (accused applicant) at 10.00 p.m. and thereafter Hadmana Ram, Ram Karan and Mala Ram took her away in a jeep. Mala Ram used to visit his house earlier also. Mali took some ornaments with her. 3. The statements Under section 164 Criminal Procedure Code of prosecutrix Mali were recorded on 16.9.1996 in which she stated that when she was going to Likhmisar village on 3.9.1996 at about 6.00 p.m. Ramkamiya told her that her uncle has called her. Hadmaniya also came there. Both of them caught her and she was taken to `khedi' of Hadmaniya. Hadmaniya and Ramkamiya committed rape. Thereafter Hadmaniya took her in a jeep alongwith Mala Ram in the jungle of Sridoongargarh. There also Hadmaniya and Ramkamiya committed rape with her. She was taken to Sardarsahar in the jungle and again Ramkamiya and Hadmaniya committed rape. Maliya also committed rape with her there. She was brought back by them to Sridoongargarh. Hadmaniya left her in front of house of her maternal father. She then narrated the whole incident to her maternal mother. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants argued that from the FIR and the statements of the prosecutrix it is prima facie a case of consent. Her age is 18 years. From the FIR it is apparent that when she left her house she took her ornaments lying in a box. It is also revealed from the statements Under section 164 Criminal Procedure Code that she did not raise any alarm and at no stage she resisted or objected to the alleged act of the applicants. Her age is 18 years. From the FIR it is apparent that when she left her house she took her ornaments lying in a box. It is also revealed from the statements Under section 164 Criminal Procedure Code that she did not raise any alarm and at no stage she resisted or objected to the alleged act of the applicants. Learned P.P. and learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the bail applications and contended that in the facts and circumstances of the case bail application of Mala Ram and Ram Karan Under section 438 Criminal Procedure Code does not deserve to be accepted. The age of the prosecutrix as per statements Under section 164 Criminal Procedure Code is 17 years. The applicants took her saying that she was being called by her uncle and thereafter she was taken in the jungle in a jeep to other places and all the applicants committed rape. She could not resist on account of fear, as it has been stated in her statements Under section 164 Criminal Procedure Code. 5. I have perused the papers in the case diary. Radiological age of the prosecutrix is opined to be 18-19 years. I have also gone through the FIR and particularly statements of the prosecutrix Mali made Under section 164 Criminal Procedure Code. It would not be proper to express any opinion or views at this stage but looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that bail application of Mala Ram and Ram Karan, Under section 438 Criminal Procedure Code deserve to be rejected whereas bail applications of Hadmana Ram Under section 439 Criminal Procedure Code could be accepted.Consequently, bail applications filed by Mala Ram and Ram Karan Under section 438 Cr.P.C. are rejected. The bail petition of Hadmana Ram, Under section 439 Criminal Procedure Code is allowed and it is ordered that he may be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) alongwith a surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ratangarh, District - Churu for his appearance in trial Court whenever called upon to do so during pendency of trial againstBail Application of Mala Ram and Ram Karan rejected and Bail application of Hadmana Ram allowed. *******