Judgment:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-17267 of 2014 (O&M) Date of Decision: 30.6.2014.
Jitender Godara --Petitioner Versus State of Haryana --Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA.
Present:- Mr.Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.Vikas Malik, A.A.G., Haryana.
*** TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA.J This order shall dispose of the present petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C praying for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case F.I.R.No.395 dated 24.4.2014 under sections 354-D, 509 read with section 3 of S.C & S.T Act, registered at Police Station, City Sirsa.
Learned counsel for the parties have been heard.
The F.I.R in question was registered on the statement of Sanju Bala, Advocate District Courts, Sirsa.
The date of occurrence is stated to be 24.4.2014 at about 3.00 to 3.30 p.m.Complainant alleges that she was sitting with another Advocate namely Ramesh Kumar as also her Clerk namely Bablu and at that point of time the present petitioner came to her seat and started giving her dirty stares and told that an officer in Kurukshetra has to be falsely implicated in a rape case and for which he is ready to furnish a handsome amount of money.
Allegations are that on the basis of such conduct the petitioner has hurt her dignity.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has furnished before this Court, during the couRs.of hearing today certified copies of the statements Lucky 2014.07.03 10:26 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh CRM No.M-17267 of 2014 (O&M) -2- of the complainant herself namely Sanju Bala as PW-1 as also other witnesses namely Bablu as PW-2 and Ramesh Kumar, Advocate as PW-3.
A perusal of the same would reveal that not only the witnesses but even the complainant has resiled from her initial statement that has been furnished to the police on the basis of which the present F.I.R has been registered.
That apart, the question as to whether an offence under section 3 of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes Act would be made out on the basis of allegations contained in the F.I.R would be a moot point.
The petitioner has been in custody since 28.4.2014.
It is not even the case made out that the petitioner would be in a position to hamper the couRs.of trial, if, released on bail.
In the totality of the circumstances noticed herein above, the present petition is allowed.
Bail to the satisfaction of Trial Court.
Petition disposed of.
(TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA) JUDGE June 30, 2014.
lucky