ORDER :

Sequel to order dated 16.11.2021, whereby the petitioner was ordered to be enlarged on bail in case FIR No. 279/2021 dated 12.10.2021, registered at PS Sundernagar, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, under Section 376 of the IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012, respondent-state has filed the status report. ASI Vijay Ram, I/O P.S. Sundernagar, is also present with the records. Records perused and returned.

2. Close scrutiny of record/status report reveals that on 20.10.2021, police after having received intimation from the Civil Hospital Sundernagar, District Mandi, that one minor girl, aged 12 years, is pregnant, recorded the statement of victim-prosecutrix (named withheld) under Section 154 Cr.PC, wherein she alleged that she is 16 years old and used to visit the house of her grandmother at Baggi. She disclosed to the police that during her visit to village Baggi, she developed acquaintance with present bail petitioner and wanted to solemnize marriage with him. She further disclosed to the police that one year back, she against the wishes of her parents solemnized marriage with the present bail petitioner and since then, had been residing with him as his wife. She stated that on 20.10.2021, suddenly, she felt pain in her stomach and was brought to the hospital, doctor disclosed that she is pregnant. She categorically stated to the police that she of her own volition and without there being external pressure developed physical relationship with the present bail petitioner. Though, on 21.10.2021, police gave application for medical examination of the victim-prosecutrix, but she refused to undergo the same. In her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.PC before the learned ACJM, Sundernagar, victim-prosecutrix reiterated that she of her own volition and without there being external pressure solemnized marriage with the present bail petitioner one year back and since then, she had been residing at her in-laws place with the bail petitioner. She disclosed before the learned ACJM that after her having solemnized marriage with the bail petitioner, she became pregnant, but once she was brought to the hospital for checkup, case was registered against the bail petitioner. During investigation, police collected record with regard to date of birth of the victim-prosecutrix, wherein it was found that date of birth of the victim-prosecutrix is 11.8.2006 and as of today, she is 15 years 2 months old. Since investigation in the case at hand is complete and nothing remains to be recovered from the bail petitioner, he has approached this Court in the instant proceedings for grant of bail.

3. Mr. Sudhir Bhatnagar, learned Additional Advocate General while admitting factum with regard to joining of investigation by the bail petitioner in terms of order dated 16.11.2021, submits that though nothing remains to be recovered from the bail petitioner, but keeping in view the gravity of the offence alleged to have been committed by the bail petitioner, he does not deserve any leniency and as such, prayer having been made on his behalf for grant of bail, be rejected outrightly.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused material available on record, this court finds that case at hand came to be registered against the petitioner on the information supplied by the Civil Hospital Sundernagar with regard to pregnancy of the victim-prosecutrix, who subsequently in her statements recorded under Sections 154 and 164 Cr.PC has specifically stated that she is 16 years old and had been meeting the bail petitioner for the last one year. She has also stated that one year back, she had solemnized marriage with the present bail petitioner and since then, is residing at her in-laws house, which fact otherwise stands duly substantiated with the statement of her mother recorded under Section 161 Cr.PC. Mother of the victim prosecutrix in statement given to the police, has specifically stated that her minor daughter has solemnized marriage wit