JUDGMENT Mr. Inderjit Singh, J.:- Lakhveer Kaur-petitioner has filed this petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.15 dated 16.3.2013 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 363 and 366 IPC and under Sections 366-A, 376 IPC, Sections 4, 7 and 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, which were added during the investigation, at Police Station Kheri Gandian, Tehsil Rajpura, District Patiala. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner is a lady and she cannot be connected to the offence under Section 376 IPC. He further argued that the petitioner is in custody since 24.3.2013. 3. On the other hand, learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab opposed the bail petition and stated that keeping in view the serious nature and gravity of allegations against the petitioner, she is not entitled to the benefit of bail. 4. I have gone through the record and have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab appearing for the respondent-State. 5. As per prosecution version, the main accused is Harvinder Singh son of the present petitioner. The allegation for the offence under Section 376 IPC cannot be levelled against Lakhveer Kaur, who is a lady. Rather, the main allegations are against her son. The only allegation against Lakhveer Kaur is that she connived in the kidnapping etc. 6. A copy of the statement of the prosecutrix has been placed on record, in which she states that she was knowing accused Harvinder Singh for the last about one year and three months, who used to harass her and also proclaimed to perform marriage with her. He also developed physical relations with her on the pretext that he will perform marriage with her. She had stated that Harvinder Singh told her to visit the house of Malkiat Kaur of her village as his mother was present there. Then on the asking of Harvinder Singh, she went to the house of Malkiat Kaur, where Lakhveer Kaur, Harvinder Singh and Malkiat Kaur were present etc. 7. Keeping in view such type of allegation, I find that the petitioner is not the main accused. She is a lady and in custody since 24.3.2013. She is not required for any investigation and interrogation purposes as the trial is going on. 7. Keeping in view such type of allegation, I find that the petitioner is not the main accused. She is a lady and in custody since 24.3.2013. She is not required for any investigation and interrogation purposes as the trial is going on. No useful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioner in custody till the final disposal of the case, as the trial of the case will take long time. 8. Therefore, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case and in the interest of justice, this criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to her furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala/Duty Magistrate. ---------0.B.S.0------------ ----------------------