JUDGMENT :

NEERJA K. KALSON , J .

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanita, 2023 seeking grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No. 67 dated 14.05.2025, under Sections 64, 61(2), 96, 137(2) BNS (erstwhile Section 376/120-B, 366-A, 363 IPC) and Section 6/17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, registered at Police Station Bhikhiwind, Tarn Taran, Punjab (Annexure P-1).

2. The case set up in the FIR in question (as set out in the present petition by the petitioner) is as follows:-

“Statement of xxxxxx d/o xxxxx r/o xxxx PS xxxxx aged about xxx years xxxx months mobile xxxxxx stated that I am a resident of the above address and have passed the xxx class. My date of birth is xxxx. I learn embroidery/stitching work in the village itself. My neighbor Karandeep Singh son of Joga Singh, resident of Kalsian Kalan, has been following me for about 6 months and used to say to me to talk to him. He used to say to me to marry him, otherwise, he would kidnap me. Despite my refusal, he continued to follow me. On date 10-05- 2025, at about 9/10 PM, we, the whole family, and my siblings went to sleep on one side of a small wall in the courtyard, and I went to sleep on the other side of the wall near my grandfather xxxxxxx in the house courtyard. When my eyes opened, I saw that Karandeep Singh son of Joga Singh, Dharampreet Singh son of Pargat Singh, and Husanpreet Singh son of Pargat Singh, residents of Kalsian Kalan, were standing there. When they were about to kidnap me and I was about to scream, then among them. Karandeep Singh son of Joga Singh made me smell some intoxicating thing and with which I fell unconscious. These three people picked me up, while unconscious, and reached the house of Karandeep Singh's paternal aunt in Mehandipur, where, leaving me in the house, Dharampreet Singh son of Pargat Singh and Husanpreet Singh son of Pargat Singh, residents of Kalsian Kalan, went back. And Karandeep Singh, with me in a semi-conscious state, committed rape all night. And the next day when I regained consciousness, I dodged him from Mehandipur village at about 6 PM and fled and came to my home in Kalsian Kalan. And I told the whole incident to my parents and we, due to fear of honor, did not tell anyone. I and my family, being in shock, could not give information.”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been in custody since 27.06.2025 and has undergone a period of nine months and one day. It is further submitted that the material witnesses, including the prosecutrix and her parents, have already been examined by the learned trial Court and have not supported the prosecution case, having turned hostile. Learned counsel further contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is also argued that there is an unexplained and inordinate delay of more than four days in the registration of the FIR, inasmuch as the alleged occurrence is dated 10.05.2025, whereas the FIR came to be registered only on 14.05.2025, without any plausible explanation for such delay. It is further submitted that the prosecutrix, in her deposition before the learned trial Court, categorically stated that she was neither kidnapped nor subjected to any wrongful act. He further states that as far as the alleged role of the petitioner is concerned, his role pertains to only helping the main accused and is not the main accused himself.

4. Learned counsel further submits that the investigation stands completed and the challan has already been presented. It is argued that the trial is likely to take a considerable period of time and that nothing remains to be recovered from the petitioner; therefore, his further detention would serve no useful purpose.

5. Learned State counsel has opposed the present petition, arguing that the allegations raised are serious in nature and thus the petitioner does not deserve the concession of r