Present: Mr. Sat NaraIn Yadav Advocate Vs. State of Haryana - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1121691
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided OnJan-10-2014
AppellantPresent: Mr. Sat NaraIn Yadav Advocate
RespondentState of Haryana
Excerpt:
crm-m-43185-2013 (o&m) 1 in the high court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh crm-m-43185-2013 (o&m) date of decision: january 10, 2014 sunita …petitioner versus state of haryana …respondent coram: hon’ble mr. justice naresh kumar sanghi present: mr. sat narain yadav, advocate, for the petitioner. mr. chetan sharma, aag, haryana, for the respondent. naresh kumar sanghi, j.1. prayer in this petition is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, sunita, wife of rambir, resident of village kaliawash, police station, salhawas, tehsil matanhail, district jhajjar (present address champapuri, street no.8, dadri, district bhiwani), who has been booked for having committed the offences punishable under sections 313, 376-d and 506, ipc; section 6 of the protection of children from sexual offences act, 2012 (for brevity, ‘pocso act’); and section 3 of the scheduled castes and the scheduled tribes (prevention of atrocities) act, 1989 (for brevity, ‘sc & st act’), in a case arising out of fir no.253, dated 24.7.2013, registered at police station, sadar, dadri, kapoor prashant 2014.01.13 14:58 i attest to the accuracy of this order crm-m-43185-2013 (o&m) 2 district bhiwani.2. learned counsel contends that similar situate co- accused, urmila, has already been granted bail by the coordinate bench of this court vide order dated 6.12.2013; that concededly the petitioner had not colluded with the persons who had allegedly committed rape on the prosecutrix; and that at best the petitioner could be charged for the offence punishable under section 313, ipc.3. learned counsel for the state on instructions from si sham sunder of police station, sadar, dadri, district bhiwani, fairly concedes that similar situate co-accused, urmila, has already been granted bail and that section 376-d, ipc, section 6 of the pocso act and section 3 of the sc & st act are not attracted qua the petitioner. however, he has opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner in view of gravity of the offences committed by her.4. i have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the material available on record.5. concededly, the co-accused, urmila, has been granted bail by a coordinate bench of this court vide order dated 6.12.2013. the allegations against the petitioner are only to the extent that few ladies took the prosecutrix to the petitioner for getting the fetus aborted. concededly, she is not privy to the offence of rape with the main accused. the petitioner is a lady kapoor prashant 2014.01.13 14:58 i attest to the accuracy of this order crm-m-43185-2013 (o&m) 3 and in view of the fact that she is a government employee, therefore, unlikely to flee from investigation or trial.6. in view of above, the present petition for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, sunita, wife of rambir, resident of village kaliawash, police station, salhawas, tehsil matanhail, district jhajjar (present address champapuri, street no.8, dadri, district bhiwani), is allowed. she is ordered to be released on bail during pendency of the trial of the present case, subject to her furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the learned chief judicial magistrate/duty magistrate, bhiwani. (naresh kumar sanghi) january 10, 2014 judge pkapoor kapoor prashant 2014.01.13 14:58 i attest to the accuracy of this order
Judgment:

CRM-M-43185-2013 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-43185-2013 (O&M) Date of Decision: January 10, 2014 Sunita …Petitioner Versus State of Haryana …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI Present: Mr. Sat Narain Yadav, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Chetan Sharma, AAG, Haryana, for the respondent. NARESH KUMAR SANGHI, J.

1. Prayer in this petition is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, Sunita, wife of Rambir, resident of Village Kaliawash, Police Station, Salhawas, Tehsil Matanhail, District Jhajjar (present address Champapuri, Street No.8, Dadri, District Bhiwani), who has been booked for having committed the offences punishable under Sections 313, 376-D and 506, IPC; Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for brevity, ‘POCSO Act’); and Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for brevity, ‘SC & ST Act’), in a case arising out of FIR No.253, dated 24.7.2013, registered at Police Station, Sadar, Dadri, Kapoor Prashant 2014.01.13 14:58 I attest to the accuracy of this order CRM-M-43185-2013 (O&M) 2 District Bhiwani.

2. Learned counsel contends that similar situate co- accused, Urmila, has already been granted bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 6.12.2013; that concededly the petitioner had not colluded with the persons who had allegedly committed rape on the prosecutrix; and that at best the petitioner could be charged for the offence punishable under Section 313, IPC.

3. Learned counsel for the State on instructions from SI Sham Sunder of Police Station, Sadar, Dadri, District Bhiwani, fairly concedes that similar situate co-accused, Urmila, has already been granted bail and that Section 376-D, IPC, Section 6 of the POCSO Act and Section 3 of the SC & ST Act are not attracted qua the petitioner. However, he has opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner in view of gravity of the offences committed by her.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the material available on record.

5. Concededly, the co-accused, Urmila, has been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 6.12.2013. The allegations against the petitioner are only to the extent that few ladies took the prosecutrix to the petitioner for getting the fetus aborted. Concededly, she is not privy to the offence of rape with the main accused. The petitioner is a lady Kapoor Prashant 2014.01.13 14:58 I attest to the accuracy of this order CRM-M-43185-2013 (O&M) 3 and in view of the fact that she is a Government employee, therefore, unlikely to flee from investigation or trial.

6. In view of above, the present petition for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, Sunita, wife of Rambir, resident of Village Kaliawash, Police Station, Salhawas, Tehsil Matanhail, District Jhajjar (present address Champapuri, Street No.8, Dadri, District Bhiwani), is allowed. She is ordered to be released on bail during pendency of the trial of the present case, subject to her furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Bhiwani. (NARESH KUMAR SANGHI) January 10, 2014 JUDGE Pkapoor Kapoor Prashant 2014.01.13 14:58 I attest to the accuracy of this order