JUDGMENT : SURESHWAR THAKUR, J. 1. The instant petition has been filed by the bail/applicant/accused, under, Section 439 Cr. P.C., wherein he seeks indulgence, of his being ordered to be released from judicial custody, whereat he is extantly lodged, for, his allegedly committing offences, constituted under Sections 376, 120(B) of IPC and under Section 4 of the POCSO Act and Section 66(E) of IT Act, registered with Police Station, Sadar Solan. 2. The victim/prosecutrix, in her initial version, rendered on 21.8.2018, vis-à-vis the alleged occurrence, version whereof was forwarded to the Women Cell, (i) has not therein ascribed qua any of the bail-applicants/accused, any incriminatory role, of, theirs perpetrating sexual intercourse upon her. (ii) subsequently, on 31.8.2018, she proceeded, to, render a statement before the learned Magistrate in proceedings drawn under Section 164 Cr. P.C., wherein also she has not with any definitiveness, vis-a-vis the identity of any of the bail-applicants, who allegedly subjected her to forcible sexual intercourse, (iii) hence ascribed with assuredness, the afore role qua them, (iv) hence given the afore lack of apposite precision and, when the latter statement, is in dire conflict, and, in disharmony with her initial version, reported to the Women Cell, (v) thereupon this Court is constrained to, prima-facie, not impute any credibility, vis-à-vis, the version, rendered, qua the occurrence, by the prosecutrix. 3. The report of the FSL concerned has been received and, upon all the items/materials, sent to it, for analysis, a report, has emanated there from, qua it being not possible to fix the culpability of the accused, in the relevant occurrence. Moreover, in sequel to the occurrence, rather want of prompt medical examination of the prosecutrix, also constrains this Court to conclude that prima-facie, she is rearing a false version, qua the occurrence, hence rendering it to be unbelievable. 4. Even though, the accused may have clicked her nude photographs, yet, at this stage, the report of the FSL, as made thereon, also does not fix the identity of the prosecutrix, qua her occurring, in the mobile phone, as sent for analysis to the FSL concerned. 5. 4. Even though, the accused may have clicked her nude photographs, yet, at this stage, the report of the FSL, as made thereon, also does not fix the identity of the prosecutrix, qua her occurring, in the mobile phone, as sent for analysis to the FSL concerned. 5. In summa, this Court is constrained to accord the facility of bail to the bail-applicant, more so, when at this stage, no evidence has been adduced by the prosecution, that in the event of bail being granted to the bail-applicant, there is hence every likelihood of the bail-applicant fleeing from justice, or tampering with prosecution evidence, thereupon this Court is fortifyingly constrained, to, make an order that the bail-applicant shall be released from judicial custody, subject to compliance, with, the hereinafter extracted conditions:- (i) That he shall furnish personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/-, with one surety, in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the judicial Magistrate concerned. (ii) That he shall join the investigation, as and when required by the Investigating agency. (iii) That he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to the Police. (iv) That he shall not leave India without the prior permission of the Court. (v) That he shall deposit his passports, if any, with the Police Station, concerned. (vi) That in case of violation of any of the conditions, the bail granted to the petitioner shall be forfeited and he shall be liable to be taken into custody. 3. Any observation made herein above shall not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case and the trial Court shall decide the matter uninfluenced by any observation made herein above.