CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS None on 4 June 1989

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Criminal Misc. No. M-631 of 2012Date of Decision: 08[th] March, 2013

Pankaj

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHIPresent: None for the petitioner.

Mr.Puneet Kumar, Public Prosecutor withASI Ramesh Kumar, Police Station City Rohtak for the respondent-State.

* * *

Naresh Kumar Sanghi, J.

Prayer in this petition is for grant of regular bail to petitioner-Pankaj, who has been booked for havingcommitted the offences punishable under Sections 313 and376 IPC, and Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and theScheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, in acase arising out of FIR No. 538, dated 11.08.2012,registered at Police Station, City, Rohtak.

The prosecutrix/complainant (name not mentioned here in view of judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court) hasappeared in the Court. She has been identified by ASIRamesh Kumar, Police Station, City, Rohtak. She statesthat due to pressure of the co-villagers she had lodged thepresent FIR. She further submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence.

From the material available on record, it transpires that prosecutrix had appeared before learned trialCourt as PW-3 and in her examination-in-chief she deposedas under:- “Stated that on 8.7.2012, I had a quarrel withPankaj son of Gurditta regarding a money dispute.I lodged a complaint in Police Station, City,Rohtak and also informed my brother about thequarrel with me and he called the villagers.Pankaj is present today in the Court. Apart fromthis nothing happened with me.”

From her cross-examination by the learned Public Prosecutor, no material could be elicited in favour of theprosecution.

The prosecutrix has appeared in this Court in person. She has been identified by ASI Ramesh Kumar.Her separate statement has also been recorded by thisCourt wherein she stated that her date of birth was04.06.1989 and as such she was 21 years old. She deposedthat Pankaj-petitioner had not done anything wrong withher. Due to pressure of few people from village Anwal, shelodged the false case against Pankaj. She further statedthat she did not want any action against Pankaj. She alsostated that she has no objection if Pankaj is released on bail.

Learned Public Prosecutor Shri Puneet Kumar, oninstructions from ASI Ramesh Kumar submits that theprosecutrix appeared as PW-3 before the learned trial Court,but she did not support the prosecution case.

In view of the facts emerging on the record,present petition is allowed. The petitioner, Pankaj son ofGurditta, is ordered to be released on bail in this casesubject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction oflearned Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Rohtak.

Since the allegations levelled against thepetitioner are serious in nature and as the prosecutrixherself has deposed that no such offence was evercommitted by the petitioner, the learned trial Court isdirected to initiate appropriate proceedings or any otherappropriate action as deemed fit by learned trial Court inaccordance with law while deciding the case on meritsagainst the prosecutrix for lodging false report against thepetitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 313and 376 IPC.

March 08, 2013 reena

(NARESH KUMAR SANGHI)JUDGE