ORDER : This is the second bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner. Earlier bail application filed by the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn on 5.7.2016. The order passed by this Court on 5.7.2016, reads as under:- “Instant application has been preferred under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in a case arising out of First Information Report bearing No.67/2016 registered at Police Station Mundawar District Alwar for offences punishable under Sections 363 and 376 of Indian Penal Code. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that he may be permitted to withdraw the present application with liberty to the petitioner to renew prayer for bail, after examination of the prosecutrix by the trial Court as a witness. As prayed, present application is, hereby, dismissed as withdrawn with liberty aforesaid. The trial Court is directed to examine the prosecutrix as first witness.” 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on record the statement of the prosecutrix (name withheld to protect her identity), who appeared in the court as P.W.1. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the prosecutrix in her statement in the court has alleged that the incident of rape had taken place on 25.1.2016 and the complaint was made to the police authorities on 20.2.2016. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the prosecutrix in her examination-in-chief stated that since the accused has extended promise of marriage after the rape, therefore, the complaint was not lodged. The learned counsel for the petitioner has read the following portion from the cross-examination of the prosecutrix as under:- ^^;s ckr lgh gS fd foDdh ls esjk fj'rk esjs ekrk firk dh ethZ ls gqvk FkkA ;s yksx nks Qjojh dks rhu ysfMt rhu tsUVl ,d MªkbZoj esjh xksn Hkjus vk;s FksA esjh xksn HkjkbZ esjs ekrk firkth dh ethZ ls gqbZ FkhA xkao ds iMkslh yksx Hkh vk;s FksA xksn HkjkbZ jkth [kq'kh gqbZ FkhA** 3. Without commenting on the merits of the case, taking into account the statement made by the prosecutrix, this Court is of the view that the continuous detention of the petitioner, as an under trial is not warranted. 4. Without commenting on the merits of the case, taking into account the statement made by the prosecutrix, this Court is of the view that the continuous detention of the petitioner, as an under trial is not warranted. 4. Consequently, the present bail application is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail during the pendency of the trial to the satisfaction of the trial court.