The voluntary nature of the relationship and the debatable issue over the applicability of the offense under Section 376 IPC influenced the court's decision in granting bail to the accused.

JUDGMENT

Fateh Deep Singh, J. (Oral) - The matter has been taken up through video-conferencing on account of lockdown due to outbreak of pandemic COVID-19.

Mr. Amit Mehta, Sr. DAG, Punjab puts in appearance on behalf of the State on his own.

2. Petitioner Inderpreet Singh Jhandu who is accused in case bearing FIR No. 21 dated 08.02.2020 under Sections 376 (2) (n) of I PC registered at Police Station City-ll, Khanna, Police Station Khanna, District Ludhiana has come up in this first anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

3. The precise allegations have come about from a girl aged around 22/23 years. In her complaint, the complainant alleges that she met the accused on a wedding function and, thereafter, they become good friends and developed intimate relationship and started living together. The accused had been maintaining physical relations with her and had even introduced her to his family and both of them had undergone symbolic marriage at a temple and, thereafter, started living together in some dwelling unit. Out of their physical relations, the girl aborted twice with consent and, thereafter, it is alleged that accused duped her and fled abroad leading to the registration of the present case.

4. Mr. Nirmaljeet Singh Sidhu, learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that both boy and the girl are major and it was a voluntary relationship, over a long period of time and has sought to challenge the very applicability of Section 376 IPC

5. Learned State counsel Mr. Amit Mehta, Sr. DAG, Punjab assisted by Mr. A.P. Kaushal, learned counsel for the complainant have strongly opposed the bail on the grounds that the girl has been duped on fraudulent pretext and she has been misused by the accused, as such, the accused is not entitled to any relief.

6. Appreciating the submissions, admittedly, both the boy and the girl are major and were in a relationship over a long period of time. The couple had been residing together, which is evident from Annexure P-2. It is admission of the girl that she got aborted twice while living together with the petitioner. Thus, a debatable issue arises over the applicability of offence under Section 376 IPC and his joining the investigation would suffice the purpose. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to appear before the investigating officer within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and on his doing so, he shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the arresting/investing officer till submission of report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. (challan). The petitioner shall continue to join investigation and shall furnish an undertaking that he shall abide by the conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. Thereafter, he will be permitted to furnish regular bail bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

7. Further, the counsel for the complainant has sought to dispute the very jurisdiction of the police whether the police at Chandigarh or at Khanna has the jurisdiction, however, the question of jurisdiction is subject to jurisdiction of appropriate Court in separate proceedings those may come about in due course.

The petition stands disposed off, accordingly.

8. However, it is made clear that if the petitioner fails to join the investigation within one month of the receipt of the copy of this order, this bail shall stand automatically vacated.