Judgment Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) Mr. Mahavir Singh Tyagi, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant which is taken on record. Heard Mr. Mohd. Safdar, holding brief of Mr. Parikshit Saini, Advocate, for the applicant, Mr. B.M. Pingal, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand and Mr. Mahavir Singh Tyagi for the complainant. The applicant is in jail having been implicated in Case Crime No.188 of 2014, which has been registered under Sections 354/506 of I.P.C. Police Station–Kotwali Laksar, District–Haridwar. According to the applicant it is a false case. Last year also the complainant had lodged a similar case in which the applicant was granted bail. The motive of this case is that there is a boundary dispute between the family of the applicant and the complainant. The order granting bail to the applicant in the case which was lodged last year has been perused in which the complainant had shown the age of the girl as 14 years. An F.I.R. filed after one year also shows the age of the girl as 14 years. There are other discrepancies also. Considering the overall evidence which is presently available before this Court, the applicant has been able to make out a case for bail. The bail application is accordingly allowed. Let the applicant (Sonu @ Sajid) be enlarged on bail in the aforesaid crime on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the equal amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate concerned. It is made clear that any observation made by this Court is only for the purpose of grant of bail. It shall not be taken into consideration at all in any other proceedings.