ORDER: P.S.Rana, J. Present petition filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 for grant of bail in connection with case FIR No. 56 of 2014 dated 19.5.2014 registered under Sections 354(D) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 12 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act 2012 at Police Station Sadar Nahan District Sirmour Himachal Pradesh. 2. It is pleaded that applicant is labourer and is a law abiding citizen. It is pleaded that prosecutrix used to like the applicant and many times proposed her love to the applicant. It is further pleaded that applicant resisted advances made by the prosecutrix. It is further pleaded that action of prosecutrix was not approved by the parents of the applicant. It is further pleaded that the parents of the prosecutrix did not keep their daughter under control which made the parents of the applicant furious and thereafter parents of prosecutrix lodged a false complaint against the applicant. It is further pleaded that applicant is innocent and he did not commit any offence and has been falsely implicated in present case. It is further pleaded that applicant will not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case. It is further pleaded that nothing is to be recovered from applicant. It is further pleaded that applicant will abide by all the conditions of the Court. Prayer for acceptance of bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 sought. 3. Per contra police report filed. As per police report FIR No. 56 of 2014 dated 19.5.2014 registered under Sections 354 (D) of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 at Police Station Sadar Nahan District Sirmour Himachal Pradesh there is recital in police report that Mewa Ram son of Sh. Panna lal resident of House No. 244/13 Balmiki locality Nahan District Sirmour HP filed criminal complaint against accused person. There is recital in police report that complainant Mewa Ram is a government employee having three children who are studying in school. There is recital in police report that applicant-accused had kept photograph of the minor prosecutrix in his mobile phone. There is recital in police report that applicant-accused intend to kidnap minor prosecutrix by way of threatening. There is recital in police report that complainant Mewa Ram is a government employee having three children who are studying in school. There is recital in police report that applicant-accused had kept photograph of the minor prosecutrix in his mobile phone. There is recital in police report that applicant-accused intend to kidnap minor prosecutrix by way of threatening. There is recital in police report that applicant-accused had earlier also developed illicit relation with the wife of police official. There is further recital in police report that a case under Section 354(D) of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 12 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 registered against the applicant-accused. There is recital in police report that site plan was prepared and statements of prosecution witnesses were recorded. There is recital in police report that statement of minor prosecutrix was also recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. before Judicial Magistrate Nahan District Sirmour HP. There is further recital in police report that applicant-accused was arrested on dated 20.5.2014. There is further recital in police report that prosecutrix was born on dated 31.5.2000. There is further recital in police report that mobile phone was sent to FSL Junga and report was obtained. There is further recital in police report that applicant-accused is in judicial custody at Nahan. There is further recital in police report that another FIR No. 57 of 2014 dated 19.5.2014 under Sections 341, 323, 147 and 149 IPC was also registered against the applicant accused which is under investigation. There is further recital in police report that another FIR No. 128 of 2012 was also registered against the applicant accused under Sections 452, 323 read with Section 34 IPC and applicant accused has been acquitted on 31.7.2013. There is further recital in police report that in the present case challan has been filed on dated 19.07.2014. There is further recital in police report that supplementary challan has been prepared which would be filed in Court. There is further recital in police report that applicant accused is a quarrelsome person and he is in the habit of harassing the women and girls and is in the habit of chasing women and girls. Prayer for rejection of bail application sought. 4. There is further recital in police report that applicant accused is a quarrelsome person and he is in the habit of harassing the women and girls and is in the habit of chasing women and girls. Prayer for rejection of bail application sought. 4. Following points arise for determination in the present bail application: (1) Whether application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 is liable to be accepted as mentioned in memorandum of grounds of bail application. (2) Final Order. 5. Court heard learned Advocate appearing on behalf of applicant and Court also heard learned Assistant Advocate General appearing on behalf of State. Finding upon Point No.1. 6. Submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case cannot be decided at this stage. Same fact will be decided when case shall be decided on its merits by learned trial Court after giving due opportunity of hearing to both the parties to lead evidence in support of their case. 7. Another submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant that challan has already been filed in present case and applicant is not required for investigation purpose and no recovery is to be effected from the applicant and on this ground bail application be allowed is accepted for the reason hereinafter mentioned. It is well settled law that at the time of granting bail following factors should be considered such as (i) Nature and seriousness of offence (ii) The character of the evidence (iii) Circumstances which are peculiar to the accused (iv) Possibility of the presence of the accused at the trial or investigation (v) Reasonable apprehension of witnesses being tampered with (vi) The larger interests of the public or the State. See AIR 1978 SC 179 titled Gurcharan Singh and others Vs. State (Delhi Administration. Also see AIR 1962 SC 253 titled The State Vs. Captain Jagjit Singh. It was held in case reported in 2012 Cri.L.J 702 titled Sanjay Chandra Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation that object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at his trial and it was held that object of bail is not punitive in nature. It was held that bail is rule and committal to jail is exception. It was held in case reported in 2012 Cri.L.J 702 titled Sanjay Chandra Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation that object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at his trial and it was held that object of bail is not punitive in nature. It was held that bail is rule and committal to jail is exception. It was also held that refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It was held that it is not in the interest of justice that accused should be kept in jail for indefinite period. Keeping in view the fact that challan has already been filed in Court and keeping in view the fact that applicant has not been convicted by any competent Court of law as of today it is held that it is expedient in the ends of justice to release the applicant on bail at this stage. It is further held that if applicant is released on bail at this stage then interests of the general public or the State will not be adversely effected. 8. Submission of learned Assistant Advocate General that if the applicant is released on bail he will again commit similar offence and on this ground bail application be rejected is devoid of any force for the reason hereinafter mentioned. Court is of the opinion that conditions will be imposed in the bail order that applicant will not commit similar offence in future. If applicant commits same offence in future then prosecution will be at liberty to file application for cancellation of bail. 9. Another submission of learned Assistant Advocate General that another FIR No. 57 of 2014 dated 19.5.2014 has been registered against the applicant under Sections 341, 323, 147 and 149 IPC which is under investigation and another FIR No. 128 of 2012 was also registered against the applicant under Sections 452 and 323 read with Section 34 IPC in which applicant has been acquitted and on this ground bail application filed by the applicant be rejected is devoid of any force for the reason hereinafter mentioned. It is proved on record that in case FIR No. 128 of 2012 applicant has been acquitted by the competent Court of law. It is proved on record that in case FIR No. 128 of 2012 applicant has been acquitted by the competent Court of law. It is held that pendency of another FIR No. 57 of 2014 dated 19.5.2014 is no ground for refusal of bail because it is well settled law that accused is presumed to be innocent till convicted by competent Court of law. In view of the above stated facts it is held that it is expedient in the ends of justice to release applicant on bail. Point No.1 is decided in favour of the applicant accused. Finding upon Point No.2. 10. In view of my above findings on point No.1 bail application filed by applicant accused is allowed. It is ordered that applicant will be released on bail on following terms and conditions on furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Fifty thousand) with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Nahan District Sirmour HP (i) That applicant will join investigation as and when called for by the Investigating Officer in accordance with law. (ii) That applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. (iii) That applicant will not leave India without prior permission of the Court. (iv) That applicant will not commit similar offence qua which he is accused. (v) That applicant will give his residential address to the Investigating Officer in written manner.(vi) That applicant will attend the proceedings of learned trial Court regularly. (vii) That applicant will not contact and will not harass and will not chase minor prosecutrix in any manner till conclusion of trial. Application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 disposed of. Observation made hereinabove is strictly for the purpose of deciding the present bail application and it shall not effect merits of case in any manner. All pending application(s) if any are also disposed of.