JUDGMENT Devendra Kachhawaha, J. - The present bail applications have been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioners, who are in judicial custody in connection with F.I.R. No.61/2022, Police Station Reserve Centre Hiranmagri, District Udaipur, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 376, 370-a and 120-B of Indian Penal Code. 2. Heard and considered arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners stated that allegation of rape has not been levelled against the petitioners; petitioners are not named in the FIR; prosecutrix 'P' has left her home on her own will; prosecutrix is a 30 years old mature lady; as per rejection order itself, at the time of medical report, prosecutrix is pregnant having a foetus of Vijay @ Pappu; petitioners Neeraj and Pintu are behind the bars since 06.02.2022 and 05.02.2022 respectively; as per para 10 of the rejection order, no other case is registered against the petitioners; and trial will take time. With these submissions, learned counsel for the petitioners prayed that the benefit of bail may be granted to the petitioners. 4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has fervently and vehemently opposed the bail application of the accused-petitioners and stated that during the statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., prosecutrix has supported the story of prosecution and stated that she was sold by Chhotu and Bhagwati Lal to Sanjay, thereafter, she was sold to Pintu and she was kept for ten days and thereafter, sold to Raju; specific allegation of rape was made against Vijay @ Pappu and Raju. Learned Public Prosecutor further alleged that prosecutrix was raped by Chhotu Lal and Bhagwati Lal also. 5. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner stated that FIR has been filed after a delay of one year and allegation of rape has not been made in the FIR. 6. Learned Public Prosecutor further alleged that prosecutrix was raped by Chhotu Lal and Bhagwati Lal also. 5. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner stated that FIR has been filed after a delay of one year and allegation of rape has not been made in the FIR. 6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly looking to the facts that prosecutrix was found in an abandoned state on 24.01.2022 at Jhamar Kotda Road, Udaipur and thereafter, kept at Sewa Mandir Swadhar Grah, ambamat, Udaipur; as per investigation, at that time prosecutrix was three months pregnant having a foetus of Vijay @ Pappu; no allegation of rape has been levelled against accused-petitioners; and trial will take sufficiently long time, therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the bail applications filed by the accused-petitioners deserve to be accepted. 7. Consequently, the bail applications are allowed. It is ordered that the accused-petitioners - Neeraj S/o Chotu Lal Tailor, (Bail application No.2419/2022), Pintu S/o Udailal Teli, (Bail application No.3168/2022) both arrested in connection with F.I.R. No.61/2022, Police Station Reserve Centre Hiranmangri, District Udaipur, shall be released on bail, if not wanted in any other case; provided each of them furnishes a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two surety bonds of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation to appear before that Court on all dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.