ORDER : 1. This petition is filed by the petitioner/accused No.1 under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking his release on bail of the offences punishable under Sections 376D, 376(2)(i), 506 read with 34 of IPC and under Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, registered in respondent-Police Station Crime No.218/2016. 2. Brief facts of the case are that One Smt. Dyamavva (who is examined as P.W.1), wife of Mahadevappa Madar, filed a complaint alleging that she is having two daughters and a son by name Parashuram; her elder daughter i.e., Fakkiramma has been given in marriage and the second daughter by name Rekha has studied upto 7th standard and discontinued the studies and is staying in the house. It is further alleged that the complainant and her husband are doing coolie and earning their livelihood. It is further alleged that Rekha, the second daughter aged about 14 years attained puberty one year back; that 10 to 12 days back i.e., on 18.08.2016 her daughter was vomiting and she even did not had monthly course. Therefore, the complainant, along with one Ratnavva, took her second daughter Rekha to Shiggaon Government Hospital, where a lady doctor, who examined Rekha, stated that she was pregnant. It is also alleged that after returning to the village, the complainant questioned her daughter Rekha, then she stated the names of three accused persons i.e., the present petitioner and two others and they committed sexual intercourse one after another in their house, near haystack and also near High School. It is also alleged that the above said persons threatened Rekha of assault and life threat and, therefore, she did not disclose about the same to anybody. It is also alleged that fearing for the prestige of the family, they kept quite. Some of the villagers came to know about the said incident and persons from Children Help Line came to the house of the complainant and gave legal knowledge and thereafter a complainant came to the police station along with the persons from Women and Children Development Department and filed the complaint on 29.08.2016. On the basis of the said complaint, a case came to be registered in the respondent-police station in Crime No.218/2016 for the alleged offences. On the basis of the said complaint, a case came to be registered in the respondent-police station in Crime No.218/2016 for the alleged offences. Subsequently, the Investigating Officer, after conducting and completing the investigation, filed the charge sheet against the accused persons for the aforesaid offences. Accused Nos.2 and 3, who claimed to be juvenile as on the date of the incident, their case was sent to Juvenile Justice Board to try in accordance with law. 3. The Sessions Court framed the charge-sheet against the accused and the trial was commenced. Totally 12 witnesses have been examined and the case is stated to have been posted on 20.09.2017 for further evidence of the prosecution. 4. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-accused No.1 and also the learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for the respondent-State. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused No.1 made the submission that as there was an allegation in the complaint that the petitioner and other two accused persons committed the alleged offence of rape on the victim girl, the DNA test was conducted in the case, as requested by the prosecution. Learned counsel submitted that looking to the conclusion arrived at by the authorities of the DNA Centre, on page No.8 at Sl. No.2, in respect of the present petitioner, there is a mention that item No.3 does not match with that of the alleles in the DNA profile of the foetus with placenta and membrane, sent in item No.1. He also made the submission that even looking to the FSL report also, no seminal stains are found on the items as mentioned in the opinion column of the said FSL report. It is also the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that even looking to the oral evidence of the prosecution witnesses, P.W.1, who is the complainant and mother of the victim girl, herself turned hostile and not supported the case of prosecution. So also, P.Ws.2 to 7 and 12 have all turned hostile and have not supported the case of the prosecution. He submitted that from the date of his arrest i.e., nearly for a period of one year, the present petitioner is in custody. Hence, he submitted that when the material witnesses have turned hostile and not supported the case of the prosecution, petition may be allowed and the petitioner/accused No.1 may be enlarged on bail. He submitted that from the date of his arrest i.e., nearly for a period of one year, the present petitioner is in custody. Hence, he submitted that when the material witnesses have turned hostile and not supported the case of the prosecution, petition may be allowed and the petitioner/accused No.1 may be enlarged on bail. 6. Per contra, the learned Government Pleader made the submission that there are 37 witnesses on the side of the prosecution and, out of the said 37 witnesses, only 12 witnesses have been examined so far and the other 25 witnesses are yet to be examined. Learned Government Pleader, referring to the statement of the victim girl, submitted that it prima facie goes to show that rape was committed by the three accused persons, including the present petitioner, on the victim girl, who was aged 14 years as on the date of the alleged incident. Hence, he submitted that, at this stage, it cannot be concluded no such incident took place. Hence, he submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to be granted with bail. 7. I have perused the grounds urged in the bail petition, FIR, complaint and also the entire charge-sheet material. So also, I have perused the materials produced today by the learned counsel for the petitioner, by way of a memo. The said material produced along with memo contain the report from the DNA authorities, the FSL report and other materials i.e., the deposition of the witnesses P.Ws.1 to 7 and 12. 8. It is no doubt true that, looking to the deposition of the witnesses i.e., P.Ws.1 to 7 and 12 including P.W.1 the very complainant and the mother of the victim girl, they have turned hostile. But, still other material witnesses to be examined are the doctor, who examined the victim girl and so also the Investigating Officer and other police officers, who recorded the statement of witnesses during the course of the investigation. Unless and until all these material witnesses are examined by the prosecution before the Court, only on the basis that some witnesses have turned hostile, at this stage, it cannot be concluded by this Court that the alleged offence of rape has not been committed at all. Unless and until all these material witnesses are examined by the prosecution before the Court, only on the basis that some witnesses have turned hostile, at this stage, it cannot be concluded by this Court that the alleged offence of rape has not been committed at all. Apart from that, the victim girl is of the age of 14 years and there is an allegation that there is gang-rape on the victim girl by the three accused persons continuously one after the other. Undisputedly, even according to the defence, the victim girl is pregnant of three months. Now, the question is regarding the DNA test report. It is for the concerned Trial Court to take a decision in the matter after examining the person who conducted the DNA test and issued the certificate and so also other important witnesses in the case. Considering the nature of the offence and its seriousness, the age of the victim girl and the allegation of gang-rape by all the three accused persons on the victim girl, I am of the considered opinion that this is not a fit case to exercise the discretion in favour of the petitioner/accused No.1. Accordingly, the petition is rejected. However, as the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner/accused No.1 is in custody since one year, the concerned Sessions Judge is hereby directed to take up the case on priority basis and to dispose of the case as early as possible.