RAVINDRA SINGH, J. ( 1 ) HEARD Sri V. P. Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Nasiruzzaman, learned counsel for the complainant and the learned A. G. A. ( 2 ) THIS application is filed by the applicant Sachin Verma with the prayer that he may be released on bail in Case Crime No. 284 of 2004 under Sections 120-B, 506, 376 I. P. C. and section 3 (2) (V) of S. T. /s. C. (P) Act P. S. New Agra district Agra. ( 3 ) THIS is second bail application. The criminal Misc. first bail application no. 18150 of 2004 has been rejected in default on 10. 12. 2004 by Honble R. S. Tripathi, J. (now retired ). ( 4 ) FROM the perusal of the record it reveals that in the present case the F. I. R. was lodged by the prosecutrix Km. Naina Singh against the applicant and three other co-accused namely Arun, yogendra alias Banti and Sakir on 14. 8. 2004 at 5. 05 P. M. P. S. New Agra in respect of the incident which had occurred on 11. 8. 2004 at about 12. 30 P. M. and 12. 8. 2004 at about 5. 30 P. M. ( 5 ) ACCORDING to prosecution version the prosecutrix was a working girl. She was employed in rapid Road Auto Agency, Sanjay Palace, Agra. Her duty hours were 10 A. M. to 6 P. M. and her duty was to register the vehicle. On 11. 8. 2004 at about 12. 30 P. M. she received a telephonic message given by a customer Arun calling her to Sur Sadan, where he was standing on the pretext of insuring two or three registrations from Dayal Bagh area but the prosecutrix refused to go there. Arun Kumar was asked to come to her office. He came at her office alongwith the applicant on a motorcycle. They taken away the prosecutrix at the pretext of providing some registration of the vehicles from Dayal Bagh area. But she was taken in a house which was under construction where the co-accused Yogendra alias Banti and Sakir was present where she was molested by the applicant and other co-accused. When she made a protest, she was given a threat of her life at the knife point, then the prosecutrix became helpless. But she was taken in a house which was under construction where the co-accused Yogendra alias Banti and Sakir was present where she was molested by the applicant and other co-accused. When she made a protest, she was given a threat of her life at the knife point, then the prosecutrix became helpless. ( 6 ) THEREAFTER, she was compelled to take a cold drink in which some intoxicant was mixed and by force she was raped by the applicant, co-accused Yogendra alias Banti, co-accused Saket and arun. Thereafter, she was taken by the applicant on his motorcycle and left her near Sur Sadan about 4. 30 P. M. then, she was returned to her house. On the next date i. e. 12. 8. 2004 she went to her office where she was advised not to go to anywhere but at about 5. 30 P. M. she went to toilet where became unconscious and then she was admitted in a hospital. Thereafter, she lodged an f. I. R. on 14. 8. 2004. According to medical examination report, she was admitted in a hospital as an unknown patient brought by constable Virendra and Ram Raj of Police Station Jagdishpura but she was identified by her cousin brother Anirudh Singh She was admitted as a suspected case of poisoning with rape history, putting her on road fallen from a four-wheelers. She was in an unconscious condition and there was an excessive frothing from her mouth. On examination traumatic swelling left fronto -parieto tempopral area 5cm x 4 cm, pin point prick marks over right deltoid (injection mark) and abraded mark 75cm over right side of eye were seen. In the opinion of the doctor it was a fresh case of poisoning head injuries with rape. In a subsequent medical examination report dated 13. 8. 2004 at 3 A. M. it was found by Medical Officer that the prosecutrix was unconscious and she was referred to S. N. M. C. Agra for gynaecological examination. In internal examination hymen was fresh torn. It was red in colour, small laceration perineum was present and clotted blood on private parts was also present. The virginal smears was taken for detection of spermatozoa, ( 7 ) THE statement of the prosecutrix was recorded by the investigating Officer. She followed the f. I. R. version. In internal examination hymen was fresh torn. It was red in colour, small laceration perineum was present and clotted blood on private parts was also present. The virginal smears was taken for detection of spermatozoa, ( 7 ) THE statement of the prosecutrix was recorded by the investigating Officer. She followed the f. I. R. version. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the prosecution story is not corroborated with the medical examination report because according to medical examination report dated 12. 8. 2004 the prosecutrix was admitted in an unconscious condition in a hospital and it was a suspected case with rape history and putting her on road fallen from a four wheelers. She was admitted by the two police constables. According to the F. I. R. version and statement of the prosecutrix it was not a case of prosecution that the prosecutrix was fallen from any four wheeler on the road side. Thereafter she was taken to the hospital by the constables to provide medical aid. It shows that the alleged occurrence had been taken place as alleged by the prosecution. ( 8 ) IT is further contended that according to the prosecution r version the prosecutrix was raped on 11. 8. 2004 at about 12. 30 P. M. but her medical examination report dated 13. 8. 2004 shows that her hymen was fresh torn red in colour, which shows that she was not raped on 13. 8. 2004 but she was raped soon before the medical examination report dated 13. 8. 2004. It is further contended that the applicant and other co-accused person has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is a student of B. Sc II year. His date of birth is 25. 4. 1986. It is further contended that during the investigation one Sakir was made accused at the place of Saket. It is further contended that the prosecutrix being major and well developed girl was moving freely and she was having her associations in which she was raped with her consent and became unconscious. ( 9 ) IT is opposed by the learned A. G. A. and Sri Nasiruzzaman, learned counsel for the complainant by submitting that the prosecutrix herself lodged the F. I. R. She was forced to be raped by the applicant and three other accused persons. ( 9 ) IT is opposed by the learned A. G. A. and Sri Nasiruzzaman, learned counsel for the complainant by submitting that the prosecutrix herself lodged the F. I. R. She was forced to be raped by the applicant and three other accused persons. Being a working girl, she was relying upon the pretext given in relation to her business work innocently but the prosecutrix was raped by the applicant and three other co-accused persons in a pre-planned manner at the knife point on 11. 8. 2004. According to the statement of the prosecutrix recorded in the trial court, she had come to the office on 12. 8. 2004 and when she was returning to her house, she was caught by the applicant and other co-accused persons and one handkerchief having some poisonous substance was kept on her mouth, the injection was injected and she was thrown from a vehicle on the road side. She became unconscious. Thereafter she was admitted by some other persons in a hospital, which clearly explains the circumstances in which she was admitted in a hospital on 12. 8. 2004. It is further submitted that according to the Medical Jurisprudence of Modi after a complete sexual intercourse Is done with a nubile virgin the hymen is usually found lacerated having one or more radiate tears, The edges of which are red swollen and painful and bleed on touching, If examined within a day or two days after the act. ( 10 ) THEREFORE the doctor did not commit any mistake in mentioning that hymen was fresh torn and red in the report dated 13. 8. 2004 because this examination was done within 35 hours of the alleged act of rape. It is further contended that in the present case the statement of the witnesses were examined in the trial court but on the date of argument the learned trial court passed the order dated 29. 7. 2005 in which charge was amended. The prosecution story is fully corroborated by the evidence adduced in the court. ( 11 ) IT is further contended that when the applicant and other co-accused Arun was released on short term bail, they were extending threat to the prosecutrix. 7. 2005 in which charge was amended. The prosecution story is fully corroborated by the evidence adduced in the court. ( 11 ) IT is further contended that when the applicant and other co-accused Arun was released on short term bail, they were extending threat to the prosecutrix. Consequently, the family of the prosecutrix left Agra and settled at Aligarh where also they extending threats and they were compelling the prosecutrix for doing compromise otherwise again she would be raped and her father and brother would be murdered. Consequently, the prosecutrix committed suicide on 22. 7. 2005, thereafter the applicant and other co-accused, an F. I. R. was lodged on 23. 7. 2005 at aligarh. It is further contended that the applicant and other two co-accused persons have committed heinous offence. ( 12 ) THE applicant and other co-accused persons had made an attempt to commit the murder of the prosecutrix on 12. 8. 2004 by administrating poison through injunction and by throwing her from a 4 wheeler in front of Anjuman Bar, therefore, the applicant does not deserve any leniency. The applicant has misused short term bail granted by this court consequently, the prosecutrix committed suicide, in which applicant and other co-accused are named as accused under Section 306 I. P. C. therefore, the applicant does not deserve to be released on bail. ( 13 ) CONSIDERING the facts and circumstance of the case and the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A. G. A. and the learned counsel for the complainant and gravity of the offence and subsequent conduct of the applicant when he was on short term bail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case the applicant is not entitled for bail at this stage. ( 14 ) ACCORDINGLY this bail application is rejected. . .