ORDER : B.N. Karia, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 14(A) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter be referred to as "the Atrocity Act" for short) at the instance of the appellant-original accused for enlarging the appellant on regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No. I-18 of 2019 registered with Chalala Police Station, Amreli Rural for the offence punishable under Sections 376(J), 372, 120(B) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4 and 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 5 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 and Sections 3(2) (5), 3(1)(R), W(1)(2) of the Atrocity Act. 2. Heard Mr. Kishan Prajapati, learned advocate for the appellant and Ms. Monali Bhatt, learned APP for respondent no. 1-State and Ms. Bhavika Kotecha, learned advocate for respondent no. 2-complainant. 3. It is submitted by learned advocate for the appellant that the appellant is innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. It is further submitted that looking to the various statements of the victim, she has changed her version and tried to implicate and omit some persons in the alleged offence. It is further submitted that looking to the allegations levelled against the appellant, if believed to be true, no case is made out against the appellant. It is further submitted that from the DNA report, it is found that victim became pregnant with relationship of other co-accused namely Surabhai Shardulbhai Adgada. It is further submitted that the appellant is having no criminal antecedent and is having liability of his family. Considering the nature of allegations, role attributed to the appellant, the appellant may be enlarged on regular bail by imposing suitable conditions. It is requested by learned advocate for the appellant to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 07.09.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No. 341 of 2019 by the Additional Special (POCSO) Judge, Rajula rejecting the prayer for releasing him on bail and to allow this appeal granting regular bail. 4. Per contra, Ms. Monali Bhatt, learned APP for respondent no. 1-State and Ms. Bhavika Kotecha, learned advocate for respondent no. Application No. 341 of 2019 by the Additional Special (POCSO) Judge, Rajula rejecting the prayer for releasing him on bail and to allow this appeal granting regular bail. 4. Per contra, Ms. Monali Bhatt, learned APP for respondent no. 1-State and Ms. Bhavika Kotecha, learned advocate for respondent no. 2- complainant, have strongly objected the submissions made by learned advocate for the appellant submitting that in the statement given by the victim herself as well as statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Cr. P.C." for short) before the Judicial Magistrate, it is stated that sexual relationship was made by present appellant with the victim and at the time of making engagement with the victim, certain money was given by him to the victim. It is further submitted that the age of the victim is aged about 17 years. It is further submitted that the statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr. P.C. cannot be denied at this juncture. Prima facie, involvement of present appellant is established by the prosecution from the police papers. Hence, it is requested by them to dismiss the appeal. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of present case and submissions made by learned advocates for the respective parties, it appears that during the course of investigation, four to five times, the statements of the victim were recorded by the Investigating Officer, wherein she has changed her version and tried to involve number of persons. It also appears from the record that twice statement under Section 164 of the Cr. P.C. was recorded by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, wherein also, she has tried to change her statement involving number of persons in the alleged offence. Prima facie, there is no active role of present appellant in committing the offence as alleged by the prosecution. It also appears that the victim has also tried to involve her parents by making certain allegations. Prima facie, there is no active role of present appellant in committing the offence as alleged by the prosecution. It also appears that the victim has also tried to involve her parents by making certain allegations. Considering the nature and gravity of assertion made against the appellant and in the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of allegations made against the appellant in the First Information Report as well as considering the role of present appellant in the alleged offence, the Court is of the considered opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion in favour of present appellant and to enlarge him on regular bail. 6. Therefore, present appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 07.09.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No. 341 of 2019 by the Additional Special (POCSO) Judge, Rajula is hereby quashed and set aside. The appellant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with C.R. No. I-18 of 2019 registered with Chalala Police Station, Amreli Rural on his executing personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court and subject to the conditions that he shall;. (a) not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty; (b) not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution; (c) surrender passport, if any, to the lower Court within a week; (d) not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the Sessions Judge concerned; (e) mark presence before the concerned Police Station on alternate Monday of every English calendar month between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m., till further order; (f) furnish the present address of their residence to the Investigating Officer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence without prior permission of this Court; 7. The authorities will release the appellant only if he is not required in connection with any other offence for the time being. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter. 8. Bail bond to be executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter. 8. Bail bond to be executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case. It will be open for the concerned Court to delete, modify and/or relax any of the above conditions, in accordance with law. 9. At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations of preliminary nature qua the evidence at this stage made by this Court while enlarging the appellant on bail. If any breach of conditions is made by the appellant, the bail granted by this Court would be cancelled. 10. The appeal is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Direct Service is permitted.