Allowed

Gurpreet @ Ravi v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC1 Dec 2017CRM-M/11060/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail petition under Sections 363, 366A, 376 IPC and Sections 4, 8 POCSO against the petitioner. Relying on the victim's testimony failing to support prosecution claims and the trial likely concluding later, bail was granted.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail pending trial subject to furnishing requisite bail bonds and surety to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.

Gurpreet @ Ravi Vs State of Punjab — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2017)

¶1

CRM No.M-11060 of 2017

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Criminal Misc. No.M- 11060 of 2017(O&M) Date of Decision: December 1 , 2017.

¶5

Gurpreet @ Ravi

¶6

...... PETITIONER (s)

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Punjab

¶9

...... RESPONDENT (s)

¶10

CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE LISA GILL

¶11

Present: Mr. Ramesh Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. Saurav Khurana, DAG, Punjab.

¶13

¶14

Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶15

To be referred to the reporters or not?

¶16

Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest? *****

¶17

LISA GILL, J.

¶18

The petitioner prays for bail pending trial in FIR No.17 dated 05.03.2016 under Sections 363/366A/376 IPC and Sections 4/8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, registered at Police Station Fattudhinga, District Kapurthala.

¶19

It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Allegations of enticing the victim are mainly against the co-accused Baljit Singh @ Bunty. The petitioner is alleged to have helped the said Baljit Singh @

¶20

Omkar Singh 2017.12.01 15:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶21

CRM No.M-11060 of 2017

¶22

-2-

¶23

Bunty. Moreover, the victim while testifying before the learned trial court on 11.10.2017 has not supported the prosecution case. She specifically stated that she was not kidnapped or abducted by any of the accused. She was never forced or seduced by any of the accused neither was she sexually assaulted. The petitioner has been in custody since 14.06.2016 and is not involved in any other criminal case. Therefore, it is prayed that this petition be allowed.

¶24

Photocopy of the statement of the victim (PW6), produced in Court today, is taken on record subject to just exceptions.

¶25

Learned counsel for the State is unable to deny that the victim in this case has not supported the prosecution version. It is verified, on instructions from HC Dharamjit Singh, that the petitioner is not involved in any other criminal case.

¶26

Trial in this case is not likely to conclude in the near future. No useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner incarcerated any longer in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case.

¶27

There are no allegations on behalf of the State that the petitioner is likely to abscond or that he is likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts before the Court, if released on bail.

¶28

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances as above but without commenting upon or expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this petition filed by Gurpreet @ Ravi is allowed. The petitioner be released on bail pending trial subject to his furnishing requisite bail bonds and surety to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.

¶29

It is clarified that none of the observations made hereinabove shall

¶30

Omkar Singh 2017.12.01 15:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶31

CRM No.M-11060 of 2017

¶32

-3-

¶33

be construed to be a reflection on the merits of the case. The same are solely confined for the purpose of decision of the present petition.

¶34

( LISA GILL ) December 1 , 2017. JUDGE ‘om’ Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No

¶35

Omkar Singh 2017.12.01 15:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Gurpreet @ Ravi v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurpreet @ Ravi v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Surinder Singh and Others Vs State of Haryana and Anr.

Diwan Chand & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Gurmeet Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Priyanka Saini Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Anil Kumar Vs State of Haryana

Manoj Vs State of Haryana