Judgment R.C.Kathuria, J. 1. Kaka Ram alias Kala Ram, petitioner-accused seeks bail in case bearing FIR No. 99 dated 24.4.2001 registered under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code with Police Station, Mulana, District Ambala. 2. The present case came to be registered on the statement of Raj Pal resident of Village Bihta, District Ambala. The complainant is employed at Workshop, Jagadhri. Petitioner-accused Kaka Ram alias Kala Ram son of Pala Ram resided in the neighbourhood of his house in the village. The petitioner-accused is employed in poultry farm. He had a bad eye on complainants daughter Mohinder Kaur and the complainant had also complained against the petitioner to his parents earlier. On 19.4.2001, during noon time, Mohinder Kaur was present in the house all alone as complainants wife had gone to harvest wheat crop while the complainant had proceeded to his place of employment. Kaka Ram, petitioner-accused induced his daughter to run away with him so as to marry him. When complainant found that his daughter Mohinder Kaur was missing, he lodged the report with the Police. During the course of investigation, Mohinder Kaur was recovered from Railway Station, Kesari on 26.12.2001 after a lapse of 8 months. She made a statement before Judicial Magistrate Ist Class on 31.12.2001, wherein she stated that she had accompanied Kaka Ram on her own accord on 19.4.2001 to Jawalaji and from there to Barwala. From Barwala, she was taken to Karala. On 10.5.2001 her marriage was solemnized with Kaka Ram at Mansa Devi temple and thereafter she has been residing with him at Karala as his wife. At the time of statement she had given her age as 18 years. The case is still under investigation. 3. Counsel for the petitioner-accused has mainly contended before me that in the statement of the prosecutrix given before the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ambala, she had categorically stated that she had accompanied petitioner-accused and married him of her free volition and thus the allegation of kidnapping and rape had been falsely levelled against the petitioner. 4. Opposing the submissions made it was contended by the State counsel that admission record relating to Mohinder Kaur was obtained from Senior Secondary School of the village wherein date of birth of Mohinder Kaur had been recorded as 22.8.1985. 4. Opposing the submissions made it was contended by the State counsel that admission record relating to Mohinder Kaur was obtained from Senior Secondary School of the village wherein date of birth of Mohinder Kaur had been recorded as 22.8.1985. Thus, on the date of commission of crime, the prosecutrix was less than 16 years of age and for that reason question of consent given by her was wholly irrelevant. 5. The merits of respective stands taken by the parties have to be adjudicated upon during the trial of the case. At the same time, one cannot ignore that Raj Pal at the time of lodging report with the Police had mentioned the age of the prosecutrix as 18 years. Even the prosecutrix in her statement before the Court had given her age as 19 years. She had stated that no inducement or pressure was exercised upon her by Kaka Ram to perform marriage with him. Under the circumstances of the case, I accept the bail application and order that the petitioner shall be admitted to bail on his furnishing bail bond and surety bond to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambala. Petition allowed.