PARDEEP Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Counsel contends that the petitioner is a handicapped person. He referred to Annexure P-4 in that regard. Counsel further states that the petitioner is in jail with effect from 29.1.2003. Investigation is complete. Trial is only at initial stage. He further states that even as per allegation of the prosecution, age of the prosecutrix, definitely, is more than 16 years. These facts have not been controverted by Shri Dhankar, on instructions from ASI Satbir Singh.

(2.) By referring to the contents of statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., counsel for the petitioner, in the alternative, contends that at the maximum it may be a case of consent. Trial is likely to take sufficient time before it is concluded.

(3.) Without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, application is allowed. Bail to the satisfaction of CJM, Sonepat.