JUDGMENT :

Anoop Chitkara, J.

COURT PROCEEDINGS CONVENED THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE

1. On the allegations made by a girl, aged 15 years, against the petitioner of having coitus with her in the end of May 2013, by entering her home, and also raping her in forest on 30th June 2013, when she was returning from school, the police registered FIR No. 82 of 2013, dated 19.07.2013, under Sections 376, 506 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, (IPC), and 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, in Police Station Gohar, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, disclosing cognizable and non-bailable offences.

2. The Police conducted the investigation, took the victim for her medical examination, got her statement recorded under S. 164 CrPC, but failed to nab the accused. Subsequently, the Police filed a charge sheet without arresting the accused. After taking cognizance of the offence, the Court issued Non-bailable Warrants, and upon its non-execution, allowed the application of the prosecution and proceeded against the accused under Section 82 CrPC, and thus, vide order dated 24.12.2013, declared the petitioner as a proclaimed offender. Per Paragraph 7 of the bail petition, after that Learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Tract Court), proceeded under Section 299 CrPC and recorded evidence including statement of the victim.

3. The petitioner's criminal history relating to the offences prescribing sentence of greater than seven years of imprisonment or when on conviction, the sentence imposed was more than three years: The contents of the petition and the status report do not reveal any criminal history.

4. Briefly, the allegations against the petitioner are that on 19.7.2013, the victim, accompanied by her father, visited the Police Station, Gohar, and complained to the Police that she was a student of 10+1. On 22.6.2013, she had gone to stay with her mother's brother, from where her school was approachable. On 30.6.2013, when she returned from her school and was going towards her Mama's place, then accused started chasing her. When she reached near a temple, then below the forest, he caught hold of her, torn her clothes, made her lie, opened the string of her salwar, and forcibly committed rape upon her. After that, he warned her that if she revealed this incident to anyone, then he would do away with her life and ran away from that place. The victim further alleged that even earlier, at the end of May, when she was alone in her home and studying in the corridor of her house, the accused came there and asked her that he had some work with her and asked her to accompany him to her room. Upon that, she followed him, and the moment she entered the room, he caught hold of her and committed rape upon her on the bed. From that day onwards, he would threaten her that if she revealed this incident to anyone, he would do away with her life. Because of the threat, she could not tell the ordeal to her parents. She further stated that it was due to this fear that she had shifted to her maternal uncle's place. She also alleged that Mahender Kumar would even write letters asking her to reply with warnings that failure to respond would lead to unimaginable consequences. She further stated to the Police that because of fear of the accused, on 15.7.2013 she had run away from her maternal uncle's house and gone to the forest and stayed in a cave alone for three days. On 17.7.2013, when she was returning from the forest and walking to her home, then on the way, one Jyoti Parkash met her and brought her home. Based upon the above allegations, the Police registered the FIR.

5. Ms. Abhilasha Kaundal, Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that incarceration before the proof of guilt would cause grave injustice to the petitioner and family. She further argued that upon being declared a proclaimed offender, the petitioner voluntarily approached this Court by filing a petition for anticipatory bail. Accused explains that he and the victim were in love, and to