JUDGMENT S H VORA, J. 1. Admit. Learned A.P.P. waives service of notice of admission for the respondent State and learned advocate Ms. SJ Shaikh waives service of notice of admission for respondent No.2 and Registry to accept her appearance. 2. By way of the present appeal under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, the 'Act'), the appellant original accused challenges the order dated 18.12.2018 passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO) & Addl. Sessions Judge, Gandhinagar in Criminal Misc. Application No.1894 of 2018 whereby, the learned Sessions Judge refused to grant regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to the appellant original accused in connection with the F.I.R. being C.R.No.I-155 of 2018 registered with Gandhinagar Sector 7 police station, Ahmedabad for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act and Sections 3(1)(w)(1), 3(2)(5-A), 3(2)(5) of the said Act. 3. Heard submissions made at bar, perused police papers and impugned order. 4. Learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that the appellant and the prosecutrix were in love with each other and the prosecutrix accompanied the appellant of her own and, thereby, abandoned the guardianship of her parents voluntarily. 5. Learned A.P.P., while opposing the application, has submitted that at the relevant time, the prosecutrix was aged 15 years 06 months. She being minor, the question of consent does not arise and therefore, the offence u/s 376 read with POCSO Act has been committed and therefore, the appellant may not be enlarged on bail. 6. Having heard submissions made at bar and considering the chargesheet papers supplied by the learned A.P.P. during the course of hearing as well as considering the statement of the prosecutrix recorded on 30.06.2018, there appears love affair between the victim girl and the appellant. Charge sheet is filed. No doubt, the victim girl went to with the appellant accused on her own and, therefore, such facts being mitigating factors, learned trial Judge ought to have considered bail application of the appellant and, therefore, present appeal deserves consideration. 7. Section 3 of the said Act obliges the complainant in opening recital, to plead the case that the accused is not the member of the said Act. 7. Section 3 of the said Act obliges the complainant in opening recital, to plead the case that the accused is not the member of the said Act. No such plea is taken in the F.I.R. itself and, therefore, in view of the decision rendered in the case of Georige Pentaiah v/s. State of Andhra Pradesh reported in, (2008) 12 SCC 531 , the provisions of said Act will not come into play. 8. This is an usual case of boy and girl having affair and then, they eloped. As the prosecutrix was minor, the appellant is sent behind prison because of the complaint lodged by the mother of the prosecutrix. Undoubtedly, a minor girl is to be protected under law as there are number of instances of sexual abuses of minor girls and, therefore, there is a special legislation of POCSO in the year 2012 and amendment in sections 375 and 376 of the I.P.C. in 2014. The judiciary takes a very serious note of sexual offences against women and specially against minor girls. Upon reading of the statement of the prosecutrix, they both eloped. Further, the trial Court rejected bail application mainly on the ground that the girl is minor and her consent is immaterial. 9. In the result, the present appeal is allowed. The Impugned order dated 18.12.2018 passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO) & Addl. Sessions Judge, Gandhinagar in Criminal Misc. Application No.1894 of 2018 is hereby quashed and set aside. The appellant is ordered to be released on bail in connection with FIR registered as C.R.No.I-155 of 2018 registered with Gandhinagar Sector 7 police station, Ahmedabad on executing bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court and subject to the conditions that the appellant 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] not leave the territory of India without prior permission of the Sessions Judge concerned; [d] appear before the Investigation Officer concerned, as and when required for investigation purpose and attend Court concerned regularly. [e] furnish the present address of residence along with the proof to the I.O. concerned and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence without prior permission of Sessions Court concerned; 10. The competent authority 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 take appropriate action in the matter. Bail bond to be executed before the lower court having jurisdiction to try the case. It will be open to the concerned Court to delete, modify or relax any of the above conditions in accordance with law. 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. Direct service is permitted.