CRM-M-356 IN THE HIG 246 Rahul State of Punj CORAM: H Present: - NIDHI GUP the Bharatiy in case FIR Sections 363 from Sexual Jalandhar. FIR (Annexu the alleged committed ra allegations o fabricated; 22.03.2023 categorically 3568-2025 -1- E HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HA CRM Date o Versus Punjab M: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDH Mr. Karminder Singh, Advocate Mr. Manmeet Singh Teji, AAG, I GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The petitioner has filed the pre aratiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 20 e FIR No. 50 dated 21.03.2023 (An ns 363, 366, 376(3) IPC and Section exual Offences Act, 2012 at Police S Learned counsel for the petition nnexure P-1) was registered on the b leged victim wherein it has been al itted rape upon the victim. Learned counsel for the petition tions of rape levelled in the FIR again as is borne out of the fact that the 2023 (Annexure P-2) recorded und rically stated that she had accompan ND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-3568-2025 Date of Decision: 31.01.2025 .… Petitioner .... Respondent NIDHI GUPTA vocate for the petitioner. AAG, Punjab. he present 2nd petition under 483 of ita, 2023, for grant of regular bail 3 (Annexure P-1) registered under ction 4 of the Protection of Children lice Station Division No. 6, District petitioner submits that the aforesaid n the basis of statement of father of een alleged that the petitioner had etitioner, inter alia, submits that the against the petitioner are false and hat the victim in her statement dated d under Section 164 Cr.P.C., has mpanied the petitioner of her own 3 of nder dren trict said r of had the and ated has own RISHU KATARIA 2025.01.31 18:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-356 free will; an further state everything h that all the m stand examin custody for Thus, it is pr opposes the that at the ti whereas the the State adm under Sectio Learned cou complainant However, respective te Learned cou medical evid learned coun witnesses, 14 to be examin 30.01.2025 in custody as 3568-2025 -2- and that she wants to live with r stated that the petitioner never f hing happened to her of her own free l the material witnesses i.e. the victim examined before the learned trial Cou for more than 1½ years. He is no it is prayed that he may be released on Per Contra, learned counsel es the prayer for grant of regular bail the time of incident, the victim was as the petitioner was 29 years of age. admits that the victim in her statem Section 164 Cr.P.C. has not supp ed counsel for the State further admits ainant already stand examined as P ver, he is unable to inform the C tive testimonies, they have supported ed counsel for the State is also unable t al evidence on record to incriminate th d counsel for State has informed tha ses, 14 have already been examined xamined. Learned counsel for the State f 2025 which is taken on record, as per tody as an undertrial for a period of 01 with Rahul/petitioner herein. She ever forced her for anything and n free will. Further, it is submitted victim and the complainant already al Court. The petitioner has been in is not involved in any other case. sed on regular bail. ounsel for the State vehemently ar bail to the petitioner and submits was minor being 15 years of age; f age. However, learned counsel for statement (Annexure P-2) recorded t supported the prosecution case. admits that the victim as well as the d as PW-5 and P-6, respectively. the Court as to whether in their ported the prosecution case or not. nable to inform whether there is any inate the petitioner. On instructions, ed that out of total 16 prosecution so far; and 02 witnesses remain State files custody certificate dated as per which the petitioner has been 01 year, 09 months and 15 days. She and itted ady n in ntly mits ; l for rded ase. the . their not. any ons, tion ated een . RISHU KATARIA 2025.01.31 18:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-356 Perusal of th in any other in view the (a) custody p petitioner as the petitione i.e. the victi total 16 pros learned tria considerable detention of released on satisfaction concerned. construed as 31.01.2025 rishu 3568-2025 -3- l of the custody certificate shows that other case. I have heard learned counsel for Without commenting on merits w the totality of the facts and circums stody period of 01 year, 09 months ner as an undertrial; (b) perusal of cu titioner is not involved in any other c victim and complainant already sta prosecution witnesses, 14 witnesse d trial Court, so far, therefore, erable time, and no useful purpose ion of the petitioner. Thus, the present The petitioner-Rahul S/o Late ed on regular bail on his furnishin ction of the trial Court/Chief Judicial rned. However, it is made clear that ued as an expression of opinion on the 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable s that the petitioner is not involved sel for the parties. merits of the case, however, keeping ircumstances of the case, including: and 15 days undergone by the l of custody certificate reveals that other case; (c) that material witness dy stand examined; and (d) out of tnesses have been examined by the re, conclusion of trial will take rpose would be served by further resent petition is allowed. Late Baldev Raj, is ordered to be rnishing bail/surety bonds to the udicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, hat nothing stated above shall be on the merits of the case. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No lved ping the that ness t of the take ther o be the rate, ll be RISHU KATARIA 2025.01.31 18:56 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.