In a bail petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. regarding alleged rape, forced abortion, and intimidation, the single judge dismissed the plea due to the serious nature of allegations and petitioner's conduct.
Petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. dismissed; pre-arrest bail refused.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Crl. Misc. No. M-10400 of 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Crl. Misc. No. M-10400 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision : 6.4.2011
Sukhdev Singh
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA
Present: Mr. Ritesh Pandey, Advocate for the petitioner.
Rajan Gupta, J. (oral)
This is a petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking prearrest bail in a case registered against the petitioner under Sections 376, 313 and 506 at Police Station Sadar Gurdaspur, District Gurdaspur, vide FIR No.147 dated 28th September, 2010.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that no offence of rape is made out as the prosecutrix was a consenting party. As regards the offence under Section 313 IPC, learned counsel submits that there is nothing on record to show that the petitioner forced the prosecutrix to consume tablets for aborting the foetus.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and given careful thought to the facts of the case.
The FIR was lodged by the prosecutrix stating that the petitioner used to rape her against her wishes and later threatened that she should not disclose this fact to anybody. After she got pregnant, he
Crl. Misc. No. M-10400 of 2011
administered two tablets to her resulting in abortion of 28 weeks of pregnancy. According to allegations, after the prosecutrix aborted, the petitioner took away the foetus. The petitioner was taken to hospital thereafter by her friend where she remained admitted.
In view of the nature of allegations in the FIR and the conduct of the petitioner, I am of the considered view that the petitioner is not entitled to concession of pre-arrest bail. The petition is devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed.
(RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE
6.4.2011 'rajpal'
3 issues framed by the court
Whether to grant pre-arrest bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a rape case with allegations of forced abortion.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to concession of pre-arrest bail given the nature of allegations and conduct.
Whether the FIR allegations establish an offence under Sections 376, 313 IPC and 506 IPC warranting denial of bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sukhdev Singh
State of Punjab
Rajan Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
