JUDGMENT 1. - I have heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned Public Prosecutor for the State and carefully gone through the impugned order and the case diary. 2. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been implicated falsely in this case. It is submitted that the applicant and the prosecutrix both were in love for quite some time and in fact parents of the girl were not desirous that she should marry the applicant, therefore, a false case has been lodged against him. He submits that there appears nothing which may suggest recent intercourse with the prosecutrix in the medical examination. He further submits that in the statement recorded late and though there is allegation of committing rape with the prosecutrix but it is of no use as the same was given under influence of her parents. It has also been submitted that the prosecutrix is major and she had accompanied the applicant to different places, therefore, the applicant's case should be considered for bail. He has placed reliance on the decisions rendered in Pappu v. State of Rajasthan, 2000(2) R.C.C. 1154 and Nissar Mohd v. State of Rajasthan, 2002(3) R.Cr.D. 116 (Raj.). 3. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application and submitted that the prosecutrix in the statement recorded under Section 164 Criminal Procedure Code has stated that she was subjected to rape. 4. I have considered the submissions made before me. A perusal of the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 Criminal Procedure Code reveals that she had been to various places and has travelled in buses and taxis. She had deposed her age to be 17 years in the statement recorded under Section 164 Criminal Procedure Code and in the medical report her age is found between 17 to 19 years, Medical report dated 22.09.2006, specifically states that there was no evidence of recent intercourse with the prosecutrix.Without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case while taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the present case, I deem it just and proper to enlarge the accused applicant on bail. 5. 5. Accordingly, the bail application filed under Section 439 Criminal Procedure Code is allowed and it is directed that applicant Rana Ram S/o Shree Mangla Ram shall be released on bail in FIR No. 147/2006 P.S. Osian, provided he executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 30,000/ - with two sound and solvent sureties in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial Court for his appearance before that court on each and every date of hearing and whenever called upon to do so till the completion of the trial.Bail Application allowed. *******