JUDGMENT S K Awasthi, J. - They are heard. Perused case diary / challan papers. 2. This first application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 has been filed by applicant, who is implicated in connection with Crime No.59/2020 registered at Police Station Jiwajiganj, District Ujjain (MP) for offence punishable under Sections 344, 363, 366, 376 (2) (N) and 323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 3. The applicant is in custody since 01.07.2020. 4. As per prosecution case, on the basis of the allegations made by the prosecutrix regarding abduction and commission of rape on the pretext of marriage, the case has been registered against the present applicant. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is a youth aged about 21 years and he has not committed any offence. It is further submitted that the prosecutrix is a major girl aged about 20 years; and according to statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, she was having love affair with the applicant. She visited Ajmer with the applicant where the applicant made physical relationship with her forcefully. However, she accepted that during the stay in Hotel at Ajmer, neither she raised alarm nor made complaint to any person, that the applicant committed rape upon her, which clearly indicates that the prosecutrix was the consenting party. It is further submitted that the prosecutrix solemnized marriage with the applicant on 26th August, 2019; and this fact is also verified by the prosecution. It is further submitted that the parents of the prosecutrix were not happy with their relationship, therefore, on the pressure of her parents, she has made false allegation against the applicant regarding commission of rape. The applicant is in custody since 01.07.2020. The investigation is over and charge sheet has already been filed. Conclusion of the trial will take sufficiently long time. Under these circumstances, learned counsel for the applicant prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 6. Learned counsel for the complainant / objector has no objection in grant of bail to the applicant. 7. Learned Panel Lawyer for the non-applicant / State of Madhya Pradesh opposes the bail application by contending that no sufficient ground is made out for releasing the applicant on bail; hence he / she prayed for rejection of the application. 8. 6. Learned counsel for the complainant / objector has no objection in grant of bail to the applicant. 7. Learned Panel Lawyer for the non-applicant / State of Madhya Pradesh opposes the bail application by contending that no sufficient ground is made out for releasing the applicant on bail; hence he / she prayed for rejection of the application. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, but without commenting anything on the merits of the case, the application filed by the applicant is allowed. The applicant is directed to be released on bail upon his / her furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one solvent surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court, for his / her regular appearance before the trial Court during trial with a condition that he / she shall remain present before the Court concerned during trial and shall also abide by the conditions enumerated under Section 437 (3) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. 9. This order shall be effective till the end of the trial, however, in case of bail jump, it shall become ineffective. 10. Certified copy, as per rules.