Skip to content


Parkash Vs. State of Haryana - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation

Court

Punjab and Haryana High Court

Decided On

Appellant

Parkash

Respondent

State of Haryana

Excerpt:


.....the medical examination of the prosecutrix no injury was found on the body of the victim including on her face, neck, breast, thighs or external genitalia, which refute the allegation of commission of rape. the perusal of the order dated 30.05.2014 passed by the trial court (exclusive court for heinous crimes against women) shows that the evidence of the prosecution has been completed and the case is at final stage for disposal. keeping in view the allegations, gravity of the offence and the fact that the prosecution evidence is complete in this case, i find no reason to extend the benefit or regular bail to the petitioner at this stage. the petition has no merit and is accordingly dismissed. 16th june, 2014 (surinder gupta) gupta) ‘raj’ judge raj kumar 2014.06.18 11:18 i attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh

Judgment:


IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRL.

MISC.

No.M-20300 OF2014DATE OF DECISION : 16TH JUNE , 2014 Parkash ….

Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ….

Respondents CORAM : HON’BLE Mr.JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA **** Present : Mr.B.S.

Dhillon, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Harish Rathee, Sr.DAG, Haryana.

**** SURINDER GUPTA, J.

(ORAL) This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C.seeking regular bail in case bearing FIR No.320 dated 04.09.2013 registered for offences punishable under Section 376(2)(i) IPC and Sections 4, 5K POCSO Act No.32/12 at Police Station Pehowa, District Kurukshetra.

Notice of motion.

On the asking of the Court Mr.Harish Rathee, Sr.DAG, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the State.

Heard.

It has been submitted that record of the case is available as the registry has already sent the information on 11.06.2014 regarding the bail application.

CRL.

MISC.

NO.M-20300 OF2014-2- As per the prosecution case, the petitioner committed rape with the prosecutrix who was 12 years of age and mentally disabled.

The wife of the complainant had seen the accused committing the rape with her daughter.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the medical examination of the prosecutrix no injury was found on the body of the victim including on her face, neck, breast, thighs or external genitalia, which refute the allegation of commission of rape.

The perusal of the order dated 30.05.2014 passed by the trial Court (Exclusive Court for heinous crimes against Women) shows that the evidence of the prosecution has been completed and the case is at final stage for disposal.

Keeping in view the allegations, gravity of the offence and the fact that the prosecution evidence is complete in this case, I find no reason to extend the benefit or regular bail to the petitioner at this stage.

The petition has no merit and is accordingly dismissed.

16th June, 2014 (SURINDER GUPTA) GUPTA) ‘raj’ JUDGE Raj Kumar 2014.06.18 11:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //