Full Judgment
CRM-M No.33419 of 2012 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.33419 of 2012 (O&M) Date of Decision: December 20, 2012 Usman …Petitioner Versus State of Haryana …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI Present: Mr. O.P. Goyal, Senior Advocate, with Ms. Sheena Khanna, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Harbhajan Singh Sran, Addl. AG, Haryana, for the respondent. NARESH KUMAR SANGHI, J.
1. Prayer in this petition, filed under Section 439, Cr.P.C., is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, Usman, son of Noor Mohammad, village Chilli, Police Station, Hathin, District Palwal, who has been booked for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 368 and 376(2)(g) read with Section 34, IPC, arising out of FIR No.141, dated 29.5.2011, registered at Police Station, Hathin, District Palwal.
2. Learned counsel contends that even if all the material available on record is taken at its face value, then also no case for the offences punishable under Section 363, 366, 368 and 376(2)(g), IPC, is made out against the petitioner. He further submits that during investigation the prosecutrix had alleged that Zafru purchased her and continued to commit rape with her. The said Zafru was arrested and put to trial. The prosecutrix appeared as PW-2 and did not support the prosecution version in the case of Zafru. Learned counsel further contends that even the prosecutrix CRM-M No.33419 of 2012 (O&M) 2 denied of having suffered the statement under Section 164, Cr.P.C., which has been relied upon by the investigating agency to prosecute the petitioner, Usman, in this case. He further submits that even the prosecutrix has disowned her statement, which was recorded by the police in terms of Section 161, Cr.P.C., in this case. He further submits that after scanning the whole material, learned Additional Sessions Judge, had acquitted Zafru, vide judgment dated 17.7.2012. He also contends that the petitioner is behind the bars from 18.5.2012. He further submits that the petitioner is neither required not involved in any other case. He also contends that in spite of several adjournments, the prosecutrix has intentionally failed to appear before the learned Trial Court for suffering her statement, in the present case.
3. In compliance of the order dated 13.12.2012, the Superintendent of Police, Palwal, and other police officials are present in the Court with complete police record.
4. Mr. Harbhajan Singh Sran, learned Additional Advocate General, Haryana, could not controvert the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. He admits the fact that the co-accused of the petitioner, namely, Zafru, was put to trial and he has already been acquitted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Palwal. He also admits that during trial of Zafru, the prosecutrix disowned the statements suffered by her under Sections 161 and 164, Cr.P.C.
5. Keeping in view the totality of the circumstances of the case; the fact that the prosecutrix had remained for approximately nine months with different persons; and the matter was not CRM-M No.33419 of 2012 (O&M) 3 reported to the police in this regard, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner, Usman, son of Noor Mohammad, village Chilli, Police Station, Hathin, District Palwal, is ordered to be released on bail during the pendency of the trial, subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.
6. The observations made herein above shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case during the course of trial. (NARESH KUMAR SANGHI) JUDGE December 20, 2012 Pkapoor