IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 27.10.2025 Harpreet Singh ...........Petitioner versus State of Punjab .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR Present: Mr. G.P.S. Ghuman, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Adhiraj Singh, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. Vijay Prakash, Advocate for Mr. G.S. Virk, Advocate, for the complainant.

NAMIT KUMAR, J. (ORAL)

1. Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking regular bail in case FIR No.67 dated 16.08.2024 registered under Sections 376, 376(2)(n) IPC and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act at Police Station Jodhan, District Ludhiana.

2. Present FIR has been registered on the statement of the prosecutrix that on the false promise of marriage with the prosecutrix, petitioner has made physical relations with her.

3. Vide order dated 20.08.2025, the petitioner was granted interim bail from 21.08.2025 to 26.10.2025 in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties and on the basis of the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that he is ready to marry the prosecutrix. The order dated

20.08.2025 reads as under: -

xx xx xx xx “CRM-M-56821 of 2024 This petition has been filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking regular bail in case FIR No.67 dated 16.08.2024 registered under Sections 376, 376(2)(n) IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act at Police Station Jodhan, District Ludhiana.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the relationship between the petitioner and the prosecutrix was consensual in nature. He further submits that the matter has been compromised between the parties and they are ready to perform the marriage. He further submits that the parties have also filed a petition bearing No.CRM-M-37395 of 2025 for quashing of the aforesaid FIR on the basis of compromise.

Prosecutrix, who is present in Court, has also affirmed the factum of compromise and marriage to be performed with the petitioner.

In this view of the matter, petitioner is ordered to be released on interim bail from 21.08.2025 to 26.10.2025, subject to his furnishing of bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned CJM/Duty Magistrate/trial Court. The petitioner shall surrender before the jail authorities on

27.10.2025.

Adjourned to 27.10.2025.”

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and the prosecutrix have solemnized marriage on 27.08.2025 and the marriage certificate has been produced in Court which is taken on record. He further submits that investigation in the present case is complete; challan has been presented; charges have been framed and out of total 15 prosecution witnesses, 02 have been examined as yet and the petitioner has undergone custody of 10 months and 29 days. He further submits that the petitioner is not involved in any other case. He further submits that the matter has been compromised, therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by detaining the petitioner behind bars.

4. Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner on the ground that he is indulged in a serious crime. However, he does not dispute that that investigation in the present case is complete; challan has been presented; charges have been framed and out of total 15 prosecution witnesses, 02 have been examined as yet; the petitioner has undergone custody of 10 months and 29 days and he is not involved in any other case.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. Keeping in view the fact that the matter has been compromised between the parties and the petitioner has married with the prosecutrix; petitioner has undergone custody of 10 months 29 days; he has no other criminal antecedents; out of total 15 prosecution witness