IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
MANISHA BATRA, J.
Sonu – Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
CRM-M NO. 58815 of 2023
Decided On : 18-01-2024
JUDGMENT
Mrs. Manisha Batra, J.
The present petition has been filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.8 dated 07.09.2015 registered under Section 509, 506 of IPC and Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (Sections 120B and 216 of IPC added later on) at Police Station Women, Sector- 51, Gurugram, District Gurugram.
2. Brief facts relevant for the purpose of disposal of this petition are that the aforementioned FIR was registered on 07.09.2015 on the basis of written complaint filed by the victim 'M' alleging therein that she along with her friend 'ME' (name withheld) used to go to a Marshal Art Academy run by one 'G' at a neighbouring village. On 04.09.2015 also she had gone to the Academy with her friend 'ME' and was sitting in the office of 'G' for the purpose of filling some form when the petitioner barged therein along with 7-8 youths and after entering therein, he opened an assault upon 'G' who while saying that he was doing something wrong with the girls. The victim and her friend tried to convince them that it was not so but he did not listen and all of them kept on assaulting 'G' and he was made to flee from his office. The petitioner had also spread a rumour in the village of the victim that something wrong was being done. Thereafter, the petitioner forced the victim and her friend to sit on his motorcycle on the pretext that he would drop them at their houses and otherwise threatened to defame them. The victim alleged that the petitioner also told her that he loved her and would kill her as well as her friend if they did not sit on his motorcycle. By saying so and frightening them, he boarded them on their motorcycle. She further alleged that while her friend 'ME' was dropped at her village but instead of taking the victim towards her house, the petitioner forcibly took her to some field wherein he committed rape upon her while pressing her mouth and thereafter dropped her at her village. Even thereafter, he kept on sending threatening messages and objectionable SMS to her on her mobile and out of fear, the victim did not disclose anything to anyone. She mustered courage to disclose about the incident to her parents only on 06.09.2015. She also took the name of the co-accused Kartikey. A case was registered. The victim was medically examined during investigation. Offences under Sections 120B and 216 of IPC were added as the petitioner could not be arrested and his mother was alleged of shielding him and avoiding his apprehension. The co-accused Kartikey was also arrested. Both of them faced trial and have since been acquitted of the charges as framed against them.
3. It has come on record that the present petitioner was declared a proclaimed person/offender as proceedings under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. were initiated against him. He could be arrested only on 09.06.2023. After completion of investigation against him, he is presently facing trial before the learned Fast Track Court, Gurugram. He had moved an application for grant of regular bail before the concerned Court which had been dismissed vide order dated 06.10.2023.
4. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner on the grounds and it is argued by his counsel that he has been falsely implicated in this case. The co-accused have been acquitted as the version of the prosecutrix and her friend had not been believed to be true by the Court who had tried the co-accused. Challan against him has also been presented. Neither the victim nor her friend 'ME' have supported the case of the prosecution and have not implicated him in commission of the offences for which he is facing trial. He is in custody since long. The trial is likely to take time. No useful purpose would be served by keeping him custody. Therefore, it is argued that he deserves to be given concession of bail.
5. The bail petition has been resisted by the State in terms of the status report. Learned State counse
The court granted bail based on the lack of supporting evidence from the victim and her friend, and the lengthy detention of the petitioner.
The court granted bail due to inconsistencies in the complainant's statements and insufficient medical evidence supporting the allegations of sexual assault.
The court granted bail to the petitioner, finding insufficient evidence for abduction charges, emphasizing the victim's status as a major and the nature of their relationship.
The gravity of the offense, evidence of forcible sexual acts, and the victim's age are crucial factors in determining bail applications in cases involving minors and sexual offenses.
Prima facie evidence of sexual assault and threat to victim's family outweighed inconsistencies in victim's statements at the bail stage.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the presumption of innocence, the need to avoid indefinite incarceration without guilt being established, and the principles of bail as outlined in....
Various principles to be kept in mind, while deciding petition for bail viz. prima facie case, nature and gravity of accusation, punishment involved, apprehension of repetition of offence and witness....
Grant of Bail - Bail is not to be withheld as a punishment.
The absence of evidence implicating the accused and unexplained delay in FIR lodging justified the granting of bail.
Grant of bail based on prolonged incarceration, delay in lodging the FIR, and progress of the trial, with emphasis on the court's neutrality and allowance for cancellation of bail if misused.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.