##PAGE1##

-1-

CRM-M-69779-2025 (O&M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

(119) CRM-M-69779-2025 (O&M)

Date of Decision:- 24.03.2026 ARUN

……Petitioner

Versus STATE OF HARYANA

……Respondent

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN ****

Present: Dr. Deipa Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Akshita Chauhan, DAG, Haryana.

Mr. Gaurav Verma, Advocate for the complainant.

ALOK JAIN, J. (Oral)

1. The present petition has been filed seeking the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 725 dated 25.12.2024, under Sections 89, 64(1), and 351(2) of the BNS and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, registered

at Police Station Mujessar, Faridabad.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a young man of 26 years and has been in custody for the last one year. It is further submitted that all the material witnesses have been examined and have turned hostile. Learned counsel specifically refers to the testimony of the victim, who is around 16 years of age, wherein she has denied that the

petitioner is the person who had committed rape upon her.

3. Mr. Gaurav Verma, Advocate appears on behalf of the

complainant and filed his power of attorney, which is taken on record.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel has filed a status report by way of an affidavit of Mr. Vinod Kumar, HPS, Assistant Commissioner of

MANJU Police, Mujesar, Faridabad, as well as a custody certificate, which are taken

2026.03.27 15:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

-2-

CRM-M-69779-2025 (O&M)

on record. He has opposed the grant of any concession to the petitioner and submits that the victim was found to be UPT positive and that there are allegations that the petitioner gave her abortion pills. However, he could not

deny the fact that the victim has turned hostile.

5. Prima facie, it appears to be a case of an adolescence love and infatuations leading to a consensual relationship. The victim is 16 years old, and there is an unexplained and inordinate delay in lodging the FIR. A perusal of the FIR, which was lodged on 25.12.2024, records that the alleged incident occurred sometime in November 2024. Subsequently, on 13.12.2024, the victim is stated to have taken some abortion pills, and thereafter, the mother of the victim lodged the FIR on 25.12.2024. However, when the testimony was recorded on 07.11.2025, the victim conveniently denied that the petitioner was the person who had violated

her.

6. Learned State counsel has specifically submitted that the DNA report is awaited and that the matter should not be left in lurch. It is observed that parties cannot be permitted to file such complaints and FIRs

and thereafter seek to resolve the matter.

7. The parties cannot be allowed to go scot-free. The parties to lis specially where the criminal machinery is invoked cannot be taken lightly and cannot be permitted resile from their statement/complaints conveniently. The process of law cannot be abused and the Courts cannot be mislead for personal benefits. It is strange that initially a serious allegation are levelled which led to the incarceration of the petitioner and subsequently while recording the testimony the complainant conveniently

MANJU turned hostile. A citizen cannot be permitted to make false accusations or

2026.03.27 15:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

-3-

CRM-M-69779-2025 (O&M)

conceal the truth from the Court. Accordingly, after the receipt of the DNA report, the authorities will be at liberty to proceed in the matter in accordance with law and take appropriate action against the victim and the complainant for giving false testimony and be that as it may the matter shall

be taken to its logical end.

8. In light of the above, and considering the fact that the petitioner has been in custody for the last 01 year, 02 months, and 28 days, and that all the material witnesses have turned hostile, coupled with the fact that the trial is likely to take considerable time, no useful purpose would