IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

210 Date of decision : 04.11.2025 Phool Kanwar @ Phool Kumar ........Petitioner versus State of Haryana .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR Present: Ms. Veena Hooda, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Priyanka Sadar, Senior D.A.G., Haryana.

None for the complainant.

*****

NAMIT KUMAR, J. (ORAL)

1. The petitioner has filed the instant petition under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No.45 dated 28.02.2025 registered under Sections 123, 351(3) & 64(2)(m) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 at Police Station Salhawas, District Jhajjar

2. Learned State counsel, on instructions, submits that vide notice dated 02.08.2025 (Annexure R-1), the complainant has been informed about the pendency of the present petition. However, there is no representation on her behalf.

3. Brief facts of the case are that on 28.02.2025, the complainant has made a complaint to the police stating therein that her husband passed away 14-15 years ago. She had only one son, who also died on 21.07.2023 due to illness. Her son was having matrimonial dispute with his wife and thus, his wife was living at her parental house. Therefore, she (the complainant) was residing in her house all alone. Around 8 months ago, her brother-in-law (the present petitioner) by giving intoxicant substance to her, committed rape upon her. Thereafter, he made physical relations with her several times after giving her intoxicants under the medicine. In the month of December, 2024, the petitioner made physical relations with her without her consent and threatened to kill her if she disclosed the incident to anybody. Due to social pressure and being afraid of, she did not disclose the incident to anyone. On the basis of the said complaint, the instant FIR was registered.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, who is brother-in-law (Devar) of the prosecutrix, is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. She submits that the petitioner has filed a suit for permanent injunction under Section 37 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 against the prosecutrix and her daughter- in-law. In the said suit both the parties were directed to maintain status quo qua possession over the said suit land, vide order dated 13.02.2025 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jhajjar. Thereafter, the instant FIR with false allegations was registered by the prosecutrix against the petitioner on 28.02.2025. She has further referred to the statement dated 02.03.2025 of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 183 of BNSS, 2023, wherein she stated that the petitioner committed wrong act with her in December, 2024 and he even driven her out of the house. Her daughter-in-law is also widow and alone. By intoxicating her, the petitioner got her land leased in his name and therefore, she should get her house and land back. Learned counsel for the petitioner further referred to the testimony of the prosecutrix recorded before the Trial Court, wherein she stated that the petitioner was head of her family after the death of her son and he looked after entire matters of home being Karta Dharta of the family and she cannot tell whether the petitioner has filed a civil suit in February, 2025. She further stated that her relations with the petitioner were normal prior to filing of the civil suit and till the petitioner was making efforts to grab her assets and committed rape on her repeatedly against her wishes and after objection, their relations became strained.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is behind the bars since 14.03.2025. She also submits that investigation in the present case is complete; challan stands presented; charges have been framed and out of total 13 prosecution witnesses, only 02 have been examined so far. The trial is likely to take a considerable time to conclude and therefore, no fruitfu