JUDGMENT Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J. (Oral): This order will dispose of all the three applications arising out of FIR No.65 of 2013 registered against the petitioners and their co-accused, Krishan Lal and Jagdish under Sections 363, 366A, 506 read with Section 120-B of Indian Penal Code and Section 8 of Protection of Child from Sexual Offence Act, 2012 in Police Station, Nirmand, District Kullu on 16.8.2013. 2. Learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record the status report and the Investigating Officer, SI/ SHO Gambhir Chand has produced the record. 3. It is disclosed from the status report as well as the record that accused-petitioner Suneel Kumar had developed intimacy with the prosecutrix somewhere 1½ years ago. They both thereafter remained in constant touch with each other over cell phones. Accused-petitioner, Suneel Kumar expressed his desire to solemnize marriage with the prosecutrix on several occasions. She, however, turned down the proposal so made by him on account of being pursuing her studies and told him that she could think about her marriage only on the completion of her studies. 4. Any how, when on 15.8.2013 the accused asked her to be ready for fleeing away with him during night, she reiterated to be not prepared for marriage as yet and refused to accompany him. However, irrespective of it he came to her house around 12.00 midnight and called her over cell phone when she was sleeping with her younger sister. He asked her to come out. Being scared that her parents, sleeping in the house may not awaken, she walked out from the house and noticed one vehicle brought there by the accused-petitioner. Besides him, there were some other persons also occupying that vehicle. She was made to board the vehicle forcibly. While she was being taken by accused-petitioner, Suneel Kumar and his co-accused, the villagers were informed by one Satish Kumar that some thieves were coming in a vehicle. On this, about 30-35 persons from the village gathered on the road and stopped the vehicle. They gave beatings to its occupants, i.e. accused persons and also came to know that the prosecutrix was being kidnapped in that vehicle. This has led in the registration of the case against the accused by the prosecutrix. On this, about 30-35 persons from the village gathered on the road and stopped the vehicle. They gave beatings to its occupants, i.e. accused persons and also came to know that the prosecutrix was being kidnapped in that vehicle. This has led in the registration of the case against the accused by the prosecutrix. Krishan Lal and Jagdish, the co-accused of the accused-petitioner have been granted pre-arrest bail by this Court vide order dated 30.8.2013 passed in Cr.MP(M) No.11341 of 2013. The accused-petitioners have however been arrested in this case and are presently lodged in judicial lockup. 5. The investigation is almost complete. The prosecutrix, no doubt, being born on 12.6.1996 prima facie is below 18 years of age, however, at this stage, in the given facts and circumstances, what is the role of the principal accused or his co-accused in enticing away the prosecutrix, nothing can be said with all exactness. Otherwise also, it is well established that an offender unless and until held guilty by the competent Court after holding the full trial has to be believed innocent. Any how, this Court refrains itself from making any observation qua the manner in which the occurrence allegedly took place as in that event prejudice is likely to be caused to the case of either party. However, keeping in view that all the accused-petitioners belong to district Shimla and can reasonably be believed to have roots in the society and as such there being no possibility of their fleeing away from justice or jumping over the bail, suffice would it to say that they deserve to be admitted on bail. Above all, the accused-petitioners are also of very young age because the principal accused, Suneel Kumar is 20 years of age, whereas, the age of Anil Kumar is 23 years and that of accused Sat Pal, 28 years. Therefore, it may not be in their interest to detain them well before holding them guilty with hardened criminals as in that event their future career is likely to be ruined. 6. Therefore, it may not be in their interest to detain them well before holding them guilty with hardened criminals as in that event their future career is likely to be ruined. 6. Consequently, I allow all the three applications and direct that the accused-petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with a case registered against them vide FIR No.65 of 2013 in Police Station Nirmand, District Kullu, be released on bail subject to their furnishing personal bonds in the sum of `50,000/- each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate at Rampur Bushahr and shall further abide by the following conditions: That they shall – (a) make themselves available for the purpose of interrogation, if so required and regularly attend the trial Court on each and every date of hearing and if prevented by any reason to do so, seek exemption from appearance by filing appropriate application; (b) not tamper with the prosecution evidence nor hamper the investigation of the case in any manner whatsoever; (c) not make any inducement, threat or promises to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or the Police Officer; and (d) not leave the territory of India without the prior permission of the Court. 7. It is clarified that if the petitioners misuse their liberty or violate any of the conditions imposed upon them, the investigating agency shall be free to move this Court for cancellation of the bail. 8. Any observations made hereinabove shall not be construed to be a reflection on the merits of the case and shall remain confined to the disposal of this petition alone. The applications stand accordingly disposed of. Copy dasti.