Point of Law: POCSO Act – Grant of Bail - Love affair with the prosecutrix and entire story of prosecution that he kidnapped the prosecutrix and raped her, is concocted.

ORDER :

The instant bail application has been maintained by the petitioner, under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of bail, in case FIR No. 122/2022, dated 19.06.2022, under Sections 363, 366, 376 of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act, registered at Police Station Indora, District Kangra, H.P.

2. As per the averments made in the petition, the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Further, he is resident of the place and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, so he be released on bail.

3. Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution story, on 19.06.2022 mother of the prosecutrix, made a complaint to the police, alleging therein that on 17.06.2022, she and the prosecutrix were in their house, whereas her husband and son had gone outside in connection with their work. After dinner, they went to sleep. However, next morning around 5:00 a.m., when she woke up, she found the prosecutrix missing from the house. She inquired about the prosecutrix in the neighborhood and came to know that the accused (petitioner herein) have kidnapped the prosecutrix, who also took with her Rs. 10,000/­. Consequently, FIR No. 122/2022, dated 19.06.2022, under Sections 363, 366, 376 of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act, came to be registered against the petitioner and the investigation ensued. On 02.07.2022, it was telephonically intimated to the Investigating Officer that the prosecutrix had preferred a petition, i.e. CRWP No. 6317/2022, in the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana for her protection from her parents. Accordingly, the Investigating Officer went in search of the prosecutrix and accused, however, they could not be traced. On 03.07.2022, father of the accused telephonically informed that he alongwith the accused and prosecutrix is coming to the police station. On arrival of the prosecutix, her custody was handed over to her mother. The statement of the prosecutrix was got recorded under Section 161 Cr. PC, wherein she has stated that she and accused have studied together and they are friends. On 17.06.2022, around 12:00 (midnight) the accused had asked her to come to meet him, as parents of the accused wanted to solemnize his marriage to some other girl and that is why, they ran away from the house. Thereafter, all the codal formalities were completed and on completion of investigation, challan was presented in the learned trial Court. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed, as the petitioner was involved in a serious crime and there is possibility that in case at this stage he is enlarged on bail, he may flee from justice and may also tamper with the prosecution evidence.

4. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Advocate General for the State and gone through the record, including the police reports, carefully.

5. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has further argued that petitioner is 20 years of age and having love affair with the prosecutrix and entire story of prosecution that he kidnapped the prosecutrix and raped her, is concocted. He has further argued that the petitioner is behind the bars since his arrest and no fruitful purpose will be served by keeping him behind the bars for an unlimited period. He has argued that keeping in view the material, which has come on record, and also the age of the petitioner, the bail application be allowed.

6. Conversely, the learned Additional Advocate General has argued that the petitioner was found involved in a serious offence, so at this stage, in case he is enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice. He has prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed.

7. At this stage, considering the age of petitioner, i.e. 20 years, and that of th