JUDGMENT K.S. Kumaran, J. - Heared counsel. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner-Gurvinder Singh pints out from the F.I.R. registered on the basis of the statement of prosecutrix-Shagun Verma on 25.3.2000 that she has stated therein that while she was going in a rickshaw to her house on that day, a Maruti car driven by Jasbir Singh alias Nitta in which Gurmit Singh was also sitting, came. Learned counsel for the petitioner also points out that it has also been alleged that Gurmit Singh told the prosecutrix that they will drop her at her house and after coaxing her, made her sit in the centre of the front seat, that she did not know what they had given her in a Coca Cola that she became intoxicated, that both of them took her to Sector 19, and that they forcibly made her sit in the car and started roaming here and there. The learned counsel for the petitioner also points out that it has also been alleged that Jasbir Singh alias Nitta and Gurmit Singh misbehaved, did the vulgar things and tried to open string of her trouser, which she did not allow them to do. The learned counsel for the petitioner also points out that it has also been alleged that they then left her at the lake and went their way, but she was found in an intoxicated condition by the police, who informed to her house, from where her mother came and took her to her house. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that from this, it will be clear that petitioner-Gurvinder Singh is not at all named in the F.I.R. but, about 4 days thereafter i.e. on 29.3.2000, a supplementary statement of the prosecutrix was allegedly recorded in which she had told as follows :- Jasbir Singh alias Nitta came to her on a motor cycle on 25.3.2000 and took her to a house in Sector 19, Chandigarh where petitioner-Gurvinder Singh alias Sonu met her. The petitioners pressurised her to drink a Coca Cola and then she was raped by Jasbir Singh alias Nitta. The petitioner tried to rape her, but on her repeated requests, he did not do so. 3. The petitioners pressurised her to drink a Coca Cola and then she was raped by Jasbir Singh alias Nitta. The petitioner tried to rape her, but on her repeated requests, he did not do so. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, points out that the prosecutrix has not all named the petitioner in the F.I.R. and has also given a completely different version in the supplementary statement involving the petitioner to some extent. He also points out that even in the supplementary statement, the only allegation against the petitioner is that he forced the prosecutrix to have Coca Cola and that he tried to rape her, but on her request, he did not do so. Pointing out the different versions, the learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail. 4. The learned counsel for U.T. Chandigarh initially contented that it was the petitioner who had taken the house on rent where the prosecutrix was raped and, therefore, the petitioner should not be released on bail. But later on, after taking the adjournment, the learned counsel for U.T. Chandigarh reported that Varinder Singh and the petitioner had taken the house on rent. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in these circumstances, the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail. 5. In these circumstances, without meaning to express any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail. 6. The petition is allowed. In the event of arrest of the petitioner on the allegations found in the F.I.R. mentioned in this petition, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing sufficient surety to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. If the petitioner is needed for the purpose of investigation, the Investigating Officer shall give notice to the petitioner giving him sufficient time to join investigation and on such notice, the petitioner shall join investigation. However, the petitioner shall abide by the provisions of Section 438(2) Criminal Procedure Code Petition allowed.