JUDGMENT Surendra Singh, J: - Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record. Submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant that the victim according to the medical opinion was 15 years and the Doctor, who had examined her, was unable to give any opinion about the alleged sexual intercourse. It was argued that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. did not support the prosecution story. More so the applicant being in jail since 11.8.2013 having no criminal history to his credit deserves to be released on bail at this stage. 2. The bail is, however, opposed by the learned A.G.A. 3. The points pertaining to nature of accusation, severity of punishment, reasonable apprehension of tampering the witnesses, prima facie, satisfaction regarding proposed evidence and genuineness of the prosecution case were duly considered. 4. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant- Dr. Mohd. Yameen involved in aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions: - 1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. 2. The applicant will not pressurise/ intimidate the prosecution witness. 3. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 5. In case of breach of the above conditions, the prosecution would be at liberty to move application for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.