LAWS(HPH)-2017-12-69

VIJENDER Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

Decided On December 01, 2017
Vijender Appellant
V/S
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of instant bail petition filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a prayer has been made for grant of regular bail in case FIR No. 12/2016, dated 21.02.2016, under Sections 342, 376, 120-B, 506 read with Section 34 IPC, registered at Police Station, Sangrah, District Sirmaur, Himachal Pradesh.

(2.) Sequel to order dated 25.11.2017, ASI Parkash Chand, Police Station, Sangrah, District Sirmaur, H.P., has come present in Court alongwith the record of the case. Mr. P.M. Negi, learned Additional Advocate General, has also placed on record status report prepared on the basis of the investigation carried out by the Investigating Agency. Record perused and returned.

(3.) Careful perusal of the record/status report, suggests that FIR, as detailed hereinabove, came to be registered against the bail petitioner at the behest of complainant/prosecutrix, who alleged that on 16.2.2016, she had gone to Haripurdhar for taking medicine for her ear. She further alleged that co-accused namely Kamal, who is also resident of her village, telephonically asked her to stay there. Complainant/prosecutrix was subsequently enticed and allured by the accused on the pretext that he would marry her and as such, he accompanied her to Paonta. As per complainant, accused Kamal made her to stay at the house of one Shri Liaq Ram, resident of Manjholi, who happened to be the friend of accused Kamal. On 17th February, 2016, co-accused Kamal committed sexual assault on the complainant-prosecutrix twice, where after, on 18th February, 2016, co-accused Kamal along with his friends including present bail petitioner namely Vijender Singh, sexually assaulted her at Paonta, District Nahan. Record/ status report further reveals that on 19th February, 2016, co-accused Kamal along with his friends including bail petitioner, dropped the complainant/prosecutrix at Renuka Road. Thereafter, instant case came to be registered against the bail petitioner as well as other co-accused namely Kamal and Liaq Ram. Since, 21st February, 2016, bail petitioner is in custody, Mr. Manoj Pathak, learned counsel, representing the bail petitioner, while referring to the status report, contended that this Court vide order dated 10th October, 2017, passed in Cr.MP(M) No, 1215 of 2017, also granted bail to main accused Kamal. Mr. Pathak, further stated that other coaccused namely Liaq Ram, also stands released on bail by this court. Aforesaid fact has been not disputed by the learned Additional Advocate General, rather he fairly admitted that both the co-accused, as named above, stand released on bail.