Back
2021 Supreme(P&H) 275
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Suvir Sehgal, J.
Arjun Bakshi - Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana - Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous (Main) No. 38485 of 2020
Decided On : 25-01-2021
Ajaivir Singh, Advocate, Abhinash Jain, Advocate, Rahul Gautam, Advocate
The central legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of the prosecutrix's withdrawal of allegations, her independence, the nature of the relationship, and the absence of evidence of coercion or influence in granting bail.
Headnote:
Regular Bail - Criminal Procedure - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 376(2)(n), Section 406 - The court discussed the allegations of rape and false assurance of marriage, the withdrawal of allegations by the prosecutrix, and the verification of her affidavit. The court considered the prosecutrix's independence, the nature of the relationship, and the absence of evidence of coercion or influence. The court concluded that the probability of the relationship being consensual cannot be ruled out, and granted bail to the petitioner.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought regular bail in a case involving allegations of rape and false assurance of marriage. The prosecutrix, after lodging the complaint, submitted an affidavit withdrawing all allegations against the petitioner.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecutrix had withdrawn all allegations against the petitioner and verified the authenticity of her affidavit. It also considered the nature of the relationship, the prosecutrix's independence, and the absence of evidence of coercion or influence.
Issues: The issues involved the nature of the relationship between the petitioner and the prosecutrix, the withdrawal of allegations by the prosecutrix, and the authenticity of her affidavit.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the withdrawal of allegations by the prosecutrix, her independence, the nature of the relationship, and the absence of evidence of coercion or influence in granting bail to the petitioner.
Final Decision: The court granted bail to the petitioner, emphasizing that the decision should not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case.
JUDGMENT
Suvir Sehgal, J. - Instant petition has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking regular bail in case FIR No.83 dated 26.08.2020 registered under Sections 376(2)(n) and 406 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Women Manesar, District Gurgaon.
2. As per the version of the prosecution, the FIR was lodged on the complaint of the prosecutrix, wherein she stated that she is 23 years old and is working in a reputed IT Company where she met Arjun Bakshi (present petitioner). They were working together in the company. They started their relationship in November 2018. She stated that they established physical relations at Gurgaon and when she refused to continue further with the relationship, the petitioner said that he will marry her. In September 2019, they took an apartment on rent where they lived together. Their relationship continued till 01.06.2020. The prosecutrix kept trying to convince the petitioner to marry her but he did not agree. She then submitted a written complaint against the petitioner with the police. Her statement was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C and the petitioner was arrested on 31.08.2020.
3. Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the relationship between the two was consensual and the petitioner did not develop physical relationship with the prosecutrix on the assurance of marriage. He has referred to the rent agreement dated 23.09.2019 (Annexure P-2), to contend that they had jointly taken an apartment on rent and had stayed together for almost one year. Still further, he places reliance upon the statement/affidavit dated 03.11.2020 (Annexure P-5) wherein the prosecutrix has submitted that the complaint had been lodged by her on account of some differences which now stand resolved and she withdraws all the allegations against the petitioner. Counsel contends that the FIR was registered by the prosecutrix in a huff as the relationship between the parties could not culminate into marriage. He submits that the investigation is complete, challan has been presented and the petitioner is no longer required for custodial interrogation.
4. Per contra, State counsel upon instructions from ASI Suman, has opposed the petition. He submits that the allegations are of serious nature and they show that the petitioner had raped the prosecutrix on the false assurance of marriage. He has made a reference to the challan, which had been presented in the Court on 08.10.2020, and submitted that there are 07 prosecution witnesses. As per his instructions, the charge is yet to be framed.
5. Counsel representing the complainant-prosecutrix has supported the petitioner and admitted the factum of prosecutrix having executed the affidavit (Annexure P-5). He has instructions to state that the complainant has withdrawn all the allegations and is prepared to appear before the Court and make a statement in support of the petitioner.
6. I have considered the respective submissions of the parties.
7. The prosecutrix has executed a statement/affidavit on 03.11.2020 (Annexure P-5), the relevant extract of which is as under:-
"2. That Arjun Bakshi s/o Yashpal Bakshi, r/o Vill.Sidhaura, District Yamunanagar, Haryana was also working in the same office since January, 2020 and even at present is posted as Process Associator.
3. That the deponent and Arjun Bakshi have known each other since November 2018 and both are unmarried. In the month of September 2019, both, the deponent and Arjun Bakshi decided to live together at Gurugram and took an apartment on lease together.
4. That unfortunately, differences arose between the deponent and Arjun Bakshi while living together for almost one year and the deponent lodged a complaint with the Women Police Station at Gurugram, following which FIR No.83 dated 26.08.2020 under Section 376(2)(n)/406 IPC was registered. The said complaint/FIR was got registered by the deponent in a state of anger and misunderstanding, whereas mutual friends, family and respectables h
