Petitioner sought bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a gang rape case against a minor. The Bench dismissed the bail application, holding material witnesses were unexamined and the allegations of serious sexual offence precluded bail without expressing an opinion on merits.
Application for grant of regular bail dismissed as devoid of merit.
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.M.No.M-34539 of 2011(O&M)
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Crl.M.No.M-34539 of 2011(O&M) Date of Decision: January 11, 2012
Hans Raj
.....Petitioner
v.
State of Punjab
.....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA
Present: Mr.D.S.Gurna, Advocate for the petitioner.
......
RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)
Crl.M.No.64258 of 2011
Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions.
Crl.M.No.M-34359 of 2011
The present petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.149, dated 23.5.2011, under Sections 363, 366-A IPC (subsequently added Sections 376 and 120B IPC), registered at Police Station Payal, Police District Khanna.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the whole record carefully including the impugned order dated 17.10.2011 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, dismissing application for bail filed by petitioner.
Briefly stated, allegations against petitioner-accused are that prosecutrix Babli Rani, aged about 14 years came in the street, where present petitioner alongwith co-accused Sonu and Khushia Ram and one unidentified person found there. Co-accused Khushia put handkerchief on her nose and she became unconscious. When she regained consciousness,
Crl.M.No.M-34539 of 2011(O&M) -2-
she found herself at a tubewell. According to her she was kept confined in the said room and petitioner-accused alongwith co-accused Khushia and Sonu committed rape upon her. She alleged that she was kept there for 1-1/2 months.
It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioneraccused that as per own version of the prosecutrix he was not earlier known to her. Further contends that petitioner-accused has been continuing in custody since 19.6.2011 and the challan has already been filed. It is also contended that as per radiological examination, age of the prosecutrix is between 15 to 18 years. Further contends that it is a case of consent between prosecutrix nand co-accused Khushia, with whom she was having love affairs. It is also contended that petitioner was arrested after 23 days of the occurrence and hence, he could not commit rape upon her for 1-1/2 months.
There are serious allegations against petitioner-accused of committing gang rape upon a minor girl. Though charge has been framed however, prosecutrix and other material witnesses are yet to be examined. Hence, it is not such a case in which relief of bail should be granted to the petitioner-accused, at this stage.
Hence, in view of these facts, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition filed by petitionerHans Raj for grant of regular bail is, hereby, dismissed being devoid of any merit.
11.1.2012 meenu
(Ram Chand Gupta) Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner accused of gang rape on a minor girl at the current stage of trial.
Whether the delayed arrest vitiates the allegations of prolonged confinement and rape.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Hans Raj
State of Punjab
Ram Chand Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
