JUDGMENT 1. Learned PL informs that notice has duly been served to the prosecutrix. 2. Applicant has filed this second bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with Crime No. 149/2022 registered at P.S - Malawar, through AJK Rajgarh, (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 363,366,376(2)(n),376(3) of IPC , u/s 3/4,5/6 POCSO Act 2012, and u/s 3(1) & (2) , 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act As per prosecution story,The father of the prosecutrix lodged a missing report on dated 07/07/2022 regarding missing of her daughter. On the basis of such missing report, police station Malawar registered Cr. No. 149/2022 and during investigation police recovered prosecutrix on dated 09/07/2022, where prosecutrix alleged that the applicant alluring her on pretext of marriage and committed rape. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this offence. There is no legal evidence available on record to connect the applicant with the aforementioned offence. Applicant's earlier application has been dismissed as withdrawn. He is 23 years young person and sole bread earner in her family. Investigation is almost over therefore, no further custodial interrogation of the applicant is required.. Statement of the prosecutrix under section 164 of Cr.P.C has been suppressed by the prosecution and deliberately not filed the same along with the charge-sheet. The prosecutrix stated in her statement under section 164 of Cr.P.C that present applicant did not committed any rape upon her and sent her back to her home. 4. Applicant is in custody since 05/08/2022 He is a permanent resident of District- Rajgarh.. There is no apprehension of his fleeing away from the court of justice. Final conclusion of trial shall take sufficient long time. Under the above circumstances, prayer for grant of bail may be considered on such terms and conditions, as this Court deems fit and proper. 5. In support of his contention, learned counsel has placed reliance upon the order of this Court such as MCRC no. 5280/2017 decided on 03/04/2017; MCRC no. 42052/2022 decided on 06/09/2022; MCRC no. 35482/2022 decided on 04/08/2022; MCRC no. 9841/2014 decided on 07/11/2014; MCRC no. 38367/2019 decided on 18/09/2019 etc. 6. Per-contra, learned PL for respondent - State opposes the bail application and prays for its rejection by stating that the prosecutrix was minor at the time of the incident. 7. 5280/2017 decided on 03/04/2017; MCRC no. 42052/2022 decided on 06/09/2022; MCRC no. 35482/2022 decided on 04/08/2022; MCRC no. 9841/2014 decided on 07/11/2014; MCRC no. 38367/2019 decided on 18/09/2019 etc. 6. Per-contra, learned PL for respondent - State opposes the bail application and prays for its rejection by stating that the prosecutrix was minor at the time of the incident. 7. Perused the impugned order of the trial Court, the statements of the witnesses as well as the case dairy. 8. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, arguments advanced by both the parties, nature and gravity of allegation as also taking note of the fact that she voluntarily left her house along with the applicant for contracting marriage with him; as per the scholar register, the prosecutrix's date of birth is 10/08/2006 and she was minor at the time of the incident, in view of the material evidence available on record, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to present applicant at this stage. 9. Accordingly, present application filed under section 439 of Cr.P C has no force, and is hereby dismissed. Certified copy, as per Rules.