JUDGMENT : A P THAKER, J. 1. This is an appeal filed under Section 14(A)(2) 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 bail in connection with the FIR being I - C.R.No.77/2018 registered with Vasada Police Station, District: Navsari for the offences punishable under Sections 376(1) and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(w)(i), 3(1)(w)(ii), 3(2)(5) of the Atrocity Act. 2. It is submitted that on the basis of the complaint filed by the complainant - victim, the accused has been arrested on 18.10.2018 and he is in jail since then. It is submitted that the appellant has preferred bail application being Criminal Misc. Application No.156 of 2019 before the Sessions Court, Navsari, Camp at Vasada which came to be rejected vide order dated 22.02.2019 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Navsari, Camp at Vasada. According to the appellant, he is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the alleged offence. According to the appellant, there is cross complaint filed by him. According to him, the present FIR has been filed after three months of so-called incident and explanation given is not plausible. According to the appellant, he is ready and willing to abide by all the conditions which may be imposed by this Court while releasing him on bail. 3. Brief facts of the present case are that the present accused on the day of Janmastimi, called the victim and told her to meet and give offer to pay rupees for sleeping with him for which victim refused and cut the phone and after that, she has told her husband that the appellant called her, so the husband of the victim told that they will meet the appellant after he came back and then again the appellant called her and made some demand which was refused by the victim. It is submitted that thereafter, when the victim went out, the appellant caught hold her and removed her clothes and raped on the victim and after that on 12.10.2018, after one month the victim told about the incident to her husband and after sometime, the FIR came to be registered against the appellant. 4. It is submitted that thereafter, when the victim went out, the appellant caught hold her and removed her clothes and raped on the victim and after that on 12.10.2018, after one month the victim told about the incident to her husband and after sometime, the FIR came to be registered against the appellant. 4. Heard Mr.Hardik Dave, learned advocate for the appellant, Ms.Monali Bhatt, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1 - State and Mr.Mrudul Barot, learned advocate for respondent No.2. I have perused the papers made available in record and the papers annexed with the memo of appeal. 5. Mr.Hardik Dave, learned advocate for the appellant has vehemently submitted the same facts which are narrated in the memo of appeal and has submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed and from the statement of respondent No.2, it transpires that the entire story narrated is concocted. He has submitted that the entire FIR is suspicious and the incident is doubtful. He has submitted that there is delay in lodging the FIR and on 12.10.2018, after one month, the victim told about the incident to her husband and, thereafter, the complaint has been filed on 16.10.2018. He has referred to the history given by the victim before the medical officer and also referred to the cross complaint filed by the present appellant against others, who have beaten him mercilessly. He has shown certain photographs of that incident to this Court. He has, therefore, urged to enlarge the appellant on regular bail on suitable terms and conditions. 6. Per contra, Ms.Monali Bhatt, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1 - State has submitted that the victim has filed the FIR wherein she has attributed specific role against the appellant and has stated that she was sexually assaulted by the appellant. She has also submitted that the appellant has given threat to the victim and as the victim's husband is serving at Surat, there is delay in lodging the FIR. She has, therefore, urged to dismiss the appeal. 7. Mr.Mrudul Barot, learned advocate for respondent No.2 has referred to the FIR and has submitted that a prima facie case is made out against the appellant and the victim has given history before the doctor regarding the incident and the photographs, which are shown during the hearing, cannot be taken into consideration as those photographs are not part of the charge-sheet. He has also stated that the delay has been explained properly caused in filing the FIR. He has prayed to dismiss the appeal. 8. This Court has taken into consideration the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, (2012) 1 SCC 40 . 9. Considering the papers on record and the charge-sheet papers made available by the prosecution, it appears from record that as per the version of the victim, she has informed happening of the same incident on the very next day to her husband as reflected from her history given to the doctor. It reveals from the FIR that on 12.10.2018, the victim has informed her husband regarding the incident and the FIR lodged on 16.10.2018. It also reveals from the statement of the husband of the victim that there was some dispute between the husband and wife regarding phone call and the husband was not relying on his wife. Considering the role of the appellant in the alleged offence and the allegation made against him in the FIR, without discussing the evidence in detail, prima facie this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the appellant on regular bail. 10. Hence, the present appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 22.02.2019 passed by he learned Additional Sessions Judge, Navsari, Camp at Vasada in Criminal Misc. Application No.156 of 2019 is hereby quashed and set aside. 10. Hence, the present appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 22.02.2019 passed by he learned Additional Sessions Judge, Navsari, Camp at Vasada in Criminal Misc. Application No.156 of 2019 is hereby quashed and set aside. The appellant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with I - C.R.No.77/2018 registered with Vasada Police Station, District: Navsari on executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the 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., for a period of six months or till the conclusion of the trial, whichever is earlier; (f) furnish the present address of his 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; 11. 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. 12. 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. 13. 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 appellants on bail. 14. The appeal is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Direct Service is permitted.