- (1.) HEARD Shri S.K. Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Javed Choudhary, learned public prosecutor.
(2.) SHRI S.K. Jain has contended that in her first statement recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C., the prosecutrix does not utter a single word about rape committed upon her. In fact, she clearly denies the fact that any rape was committed by the petitioner upon her. It is only in her supplementary statement, recorded two days later that for the first time, she claims the commission of rape; secondly even in her second statement, she comes up with an improbable story. She claims that the petitioner had allegedly raped her a number of time and despite this fact, she is still accompanied him to a great distance. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. In fact, both the petitioner and the prosecutrix, are students studying in the same school and both of them had decided to go and attend the Dashera festival at Kota. On the other hand, Shri Javed Choudhary, the learned Public Prosecutor has contended that the prosecutrix does allege the offence in her supplementary statement and part of her statement is corroborated by the medical evidence. Without expressing any opinion on the merits or demerits of the case, this court is inclined to grant the benefit of bail to the petitioner, namely Jeetu @ Jitendra S/o Shri Rampal provided his parents furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with two sureties in the amount of Rs.15,000/- each, to the satisfaction of the Board to the effect that he shall appear before the Board on 4.1.2010 and as and when called upon to do so. The revision petition is hereby allowed.;