JUDGMENT : P.K. Lohra, J. Accused-Appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST Act to challenge order dated 12th of February, 2018 passed by Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Merta (for short, 'learned trial Court') rejecting his post-arrest bail application arising out of FIR No.110/2016 of Merta Road Police Station, District Nagaur. In the FIR, appellant is charged for offence punishable under Sections 363, 366-A, 342, 376 IPC and 5/6 of the POCSO Act. 2. It is argued by learned counsel for the appellant that the learned trial Court, while declining bail to the appellant, has not at all cared to examine the statement of Dr. Amit Kumar wherein he has clearly stated that prosecutrix is above 18 years of age. Learned counsel further submits that lodging of FIR after delay of more than one and half months from the date of alleged incident per se creates serious doubts about incident. It is also submitted by learned counsel that prosecutrix accompanied the appellant of her own volition, and remained with him for about two months, and thereafter she lodged the FIR, is sufficient to show that the allegations are false and concocted. It is also submitted by learned counsel that there are material contradictions in the statements of prosecutrix during cross-examination and furthermore she has denied in her statement that she was ever subjected to medical examination. Lastly, learned counsel has submitted that appellant is in custody since last about one and half years and completion of trial is likely to take considerable time, therefore, impugned order is liable to be upset and appellant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the appeal and submits that looking to the gravity and magnitude of offences attributed to the appellant, no interference with the impugned order is warranted. Learned Public Prosecutor further submits that the learned trial Court, in its discretion, has declined the prayer for bail to the appellant which is not liable to be tinkered with in exercise of appellate jurisdiction. 4. I have bestowed my consideration to the arguments advanced at the Bar and perused the impugned order. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, in my opinion, learned trial Court has seriously erred in declining bail to the appellant. 5. 4. I have bestowed my consideration to the arguments advanced at the Bar and perused the impugned order. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, in my opinion, learned trial Court has seriously erred in declining bail to the appellant. 5. Consequently, appeal is allowed, the impugned order passed by learned trial Court is set aside and it is ordered that accused appellant, Ramdev S/o Shri Bhopal Ram, arrested in connection with FIR No.110/2016, Police Station Merta Road, District Nagaur may be released on bail; provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two surety bonds of like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial court with the stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.