JUDGMENT Shivashankar Amarannavar, J. - This petition is filed by the petitioner-accused under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking bail in Crime No.191/2019 of Bailhongal Police Station registered for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 344, 376(2)(n) and 506 of IPC. 2. The case of the prosecution is that victim girl has lodged a complaint stating that, she got married three months back with her nephew and residing with her husband and along with in-laws. It is further alleged that very often the petitioner-accused from the same village use to come to her house. The victim girl knows the petitioner personally. Because of Panchami Festival the victim girl came to her mother s village i.e. Yardal and stayed there for few days. Before the victim s marriage, the victim has made the Aadhar Card wherein her name, her father s name and her surname was entered. After the victims marriage it was necessary for her to enter her name along with her husband s name and her address in her Adhaar Card. Hence, on 11.09.2019, the victim girl came to Nemadi Kendra of Bailhongal near to Tahasildar Office Bailhongal along with her mother for necessary correctins in her previous Aadhaar Card. Later at about 2.00 p.m. in order to get the Xerox copies of her Aadhaar card, the victim girl left her mother at Nemadi Kendra and proceeded towards Sangolli Rayanna Circle of Bailhongal. There the victim girl met petitioner. After seeing the victim girl, the petitioner asked why she is here and for what purpose. The victim girl replied that, she came to Tahasildar Office, Bailhongal for necessary corrections in her previous Aadhaar Card, as the victim has married three months back, so the victim wanted to enter the name of her husband, surname and address in her new Aadhaar Card. Later the petitioner requested the victim to come and sit on his two wheeler to go and get Xerox copies of her Aadhaar Card. The victim girl boarded his two wheeler so that she can get the photo copies of Aadhaar Card as she knows the petitioner-accused, she went on his motor cycle. The petitioner taken the victim girl on his two wheeler and crossed Bailhongal limits and therefore the victim girl asked him and he threatened her and took her to Sirasangi and thereafter to Ratnagiri distict in Maharastra State and reached at 3 p.m. on 12.09.2019. The petitioner taken the victim girl on his two wheeler and crossed Bailhongal limits and therefore the victim girl asked him and he threatened her and took her to Sirasangi and thereafter to Ratnagiri distict in Maharastra State and reached at 3 p.m. on 12.09.2019. It is further alleged that they entered a house and on looking to the things available in that house, it was occupied by the petitioner and it is his work place. The victim girl asked his cell phone so as to intimate her mother and he refused and threatened her. It is further alleged that on 12.09.2019 at about 10 p.m. petitioner sexually assaulted the victim against her will and wish by force and later on he did the same daily between 12.09.2019 to 23.09.2019. It is further alleged that on 24.09.2019at about 3 p.m. the petitioner went outside of the house by taking his two wheeler vehicle. And in the mean time the Police Officers from Bailhongal approached to the house of the said petitioner and enquired the victim s name and address and took the victim to the Bailhongal Police Station. After coming to Bailhongal Police Station, the victim came to know that on 13.09.2019 her mother has already filed a missing complaint. Later the victim gave information and lodged the complaint in writing in Bailhongal Police Station with regard to the above said incident. Bailhongal P.S. have registered a case under Crime No.191/2019 for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 344, 376(2)(n) and 506 of IPC. The petitioner was arrested on 27.09.2019. After completion of investigation, Bailhongal Police have filed charge sheet and case has been committed to VIII Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi pending in SC No.54/2020. Petitioner has filed bail application before VIII Addl District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi in Crl.Misc.No.440/2020 and the same is rejected on 09.03.2020. Therefore, the petitioneraccused is before this Court seeking bail. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused and learned HCGP for respondent-State. 4. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused that date of incident is 11.09.2019 and the missing complaint has been filed on 13.09.2019 by her mother which came to be registered in Crime No.180/2019. Victim girl has been traced in Ratnagiri, Maharastra State on 24.09.2019 and she filed complaint on 25.09.2019. There is a delay in filing the complaint. Victim girl has been traced in Ratnagiri, Maharastra State on 24.09.2019 and she filed complaint on 25.09.2019. There is a delay in filing the complaint. It is his further submission that the victim girl is aged 19 years and she had a love affair with the petitioner. It is his further submission that the medical examination report reveal only hymen tear and there is no rapture of hymen and in medical examination report it is opined that victim girls dental age is about 18 years and skeletal age is between 18 to 19 years. It is further alleged that charge sheet has been filed and petitioner is not required for the custodial interrogation. On these grounds he prays to allow the bail petition. 5. Per contra, the learned HCGP contended that victim is a married woman aged 18 years. Petitioner-accused abducted her and took her to Ratnagiri, Maharastra State and sexually assaulted against her will by threatening her. It is his further submission that there is a prima facie case against the petitioner-accused for the offences alleged against him. It is his further submission that if the petitioner-accused is granted with bail, he will tamper the prosecution witnesses and flee from justice. With this, he prays to reject the bail petition. 6. Having regard to the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner-accused and the learned HCGP, this Court has gone through the charge sheet records. The victim girl is a married woman aged 19 years. As per medical examination report, the dental age of the victim is 18 years and skeletal age is between 18 to 19 years. It is alleged that petitioner-accused took the victim girl on his motor cycle from Bailhongal to Ratnagiri in Maharastra State about a distance of more than 500 Kms. If the victim girl is not interested to go with him she should have resisted the petitioner by making hue and cry. But she has not done so. The medical examination report reveals that hymen of victim girl is torn and no opinion with regard to no sexual assault has given in it. On looking to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that there is affair between the petitioner and the victim girl. The victim girl is aged 19 years having knowledge and understanding of the consequences of her acts. 7. On looking to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that there is affair between the petitioner and the victim girl. The victim girl is aged 19 years having knowledge and understanding of the consequences of her acts. 7. It is well settled that matters to be considered in an application for bail are: (i) Whether there is any prima facie or reasonable ground to believe that the accused had committed the offence; (ii) nature and gravity of the charge; (iii) severity of the punishment in the event of conviction; (iv) danger of the accused absconding or fleeing, if released on bail; (v) character, behaviour, means, position and standing of the accused; (vi) likelihood of the offence being repeated; (vii) reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with; and (viii) danger, of course, of justice being thwarted by grant of bail. While a vague allegation that the accused may tamper with the evidence or witnesses, may not be a ground to refuse bail, if the accused is of such character that his mere presence at large would intimidate the witnesses or if there is material to show that he will use his liberty to subvert justice or tamper with the evidence, then bail will be refused. 8. In a decision in the case of DATARAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF UTTARA PRADESH AND ANOTHER, (2018) 3 SCC 22 , the Hon ble Apex Court held as under: A fundamental postulate of criminal jurisprudence is the presumption of innocence, meaning thereby that a person is believed to be innocent until found guilty. However, there are instances in our criminal law where a reverse onus has been placed on an accused with regard to some specific offences but that is another matter and does not detract from the fundamental postulate in respect of other offences. Yet another important facet of our criminal jurisprudence is that the grant of bail is the general rule and putting a person in jail or in a prison or in a correction home (whichever expression one may wish to use) is an exception. Unfortunately, some of these basic principles appear to have been lost sight of with the result that more and more persons are being incarcerated and for longer periods. This does not do any good to our criminal jurisprudence or to our society. 9. In the present case the investigation is completed. Unfortunately, some of these basic principles appear to have been lost sight of with the result that more and more persons are being incarcerated and for longer periods. This does not do any good to our criminal jurisprudence or to our society. 9. In the present case the investigation is completed. Charge sheet has been filed. No grounds have been made out by the prosecution for custodial interrogation of the petitioner-accused. Petitioner-accused is in judicial custody since 27.09.2019. The petitioner-accused is residing in the address shown in the cause title and it is not disputed. The main objection of the prosecution is that in the event of grant of bail, the petitioner-accused is likely to cause threat to the complainant and prosecution witnesses. The said objection may be set right by imposing some stringent conditions. 10. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered view that there are valid grounds for grant of bail subject to conditions. Hence, I pass the following. ORDER The petition filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. The petitioner-accused shall be released on bail in Crime No.191/2019 of Bailhongal Police Station, subject to the following conditions. i) The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-(one lakh rupees only) with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court. In view of Covid-19 petitioner is permitted to furnish surety within two months. If circumstances arise, jurisdictional court is permitted to extend the time for furnishing surety. ii) The petitioner shall not indulge in tampering the prosecution witnesses in any manner. iii) The petitioner shall appear before the Court regularly and cooperate in speedy disposal of the case.