CRM-M-44550 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT (207) Deepak @ Deepak Kumar State of Haryana CORAM: Present: ALOK JAIN, J. (Oral) 1. FIR No. 46 dated 03.09.2024, registered under Sections 137, 351(2), 61(2), 65(1), 74, 75(2), 96 of the BNS and Sections 4 and 8 of the POCSO Act, at Women Police Station, Kaithal. 2. status report along with annexures by way of an affidavit of Sh. Sushil Parkash, HPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police (Crime), Kaithal, on behalf of the respondent 3. has been falsely implicated and the prosecutrix version. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argues that i highly improbable that again if she 44550-2025 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Deepak Kumar Versus State of Haryana and Anr. HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN **** Mr. Samay Singh Sandhawalia, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Swati Batra, Sr. DAG, Haryana assisted by ASI Manjeet. ***** ALOK JAIN, J. (Oral) The prayer is for the grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 46 dated 03.09.2024, registered under Sections 137, 351(2), 61(2), 65(1), 74, 75(2), 96 of the BNS and Sections 4 and 8 of the POCSO Act, at Women Police Station, Kaithal. Learned State counsel has filed the status report along with annexures by way of an affidavit of Sh. Sushil Parkash, HPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police (Crime), Kaithal, on behalf of the respondent-State, which are taken on record. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and the prosecutrix Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argues that i highly improbable that the prosecutrix would return was violated on the intervening -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-44550-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:- 24.09.2025 ……Petitioner ……Respondents ALOK JAIN Mr. Samay Singh Sandhawalia, Advocate for the petitioner. . Swati Batra, Sr. DAG, Haryana assisted by ASI Manjeet. of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 46 dated 03.09.2024, registered under Sections 137, 351(2), 61(2), 65(1), 74, 75(2), 96 of the BNS and Sections 4 and 8 of the POCSO Act, at Learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate and status report along with annexures by way of an affidavit of Sh. Sushil Parkash, HPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police (Crime), Kaithal, on behalf State, which are taken on record. ioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and the prosecutrix keeps on changing her Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argues that it is the prosecutrix would return to the same person intervening night of 14-15 July, 2024. As 24.09.2025 ……Petitioner s of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 46 dated 03.09.2024, registered under Sections 137, 351(2), 61(2), 65(1), 74, 75(2), 96 of the BNS and Sections 4 and 8 of the POCSO Act, at custody certificate and status report along with annexures by way of an affidavit of Sh. Sushil Parkash, HPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police (Crime), Kaithal, on behalf ioner submits that the petitioner changing her t is same person . As MANJU 2025.09.24 18:37 I agree to specified portions of this document CRM-M-44550 per the statement of the prosecutrix dated 04.09.2024 it was alleged that prosecutrix was where she was asked to stand, and thereafter both the hotel and in the meanwhile prosecutrix’s aunt called the petitioner to come back. Moreover, while returning behind the roadside bushes and the petitioner submits that it is inconceivable that if the prosecutrix was taken away forcibly, she would not raised an alarm and instead follow the petitioner’s instructions. stage. It was only during her testimony before the Court on much after the alleged incident she was sexually assaulted. 4. medical report the history provided by the prosecutrix. 5. the medical report is also incorrect testimony. In the whereas prosecutrix in her initial testimony stated that 6. 7. assault. The FIR only states that the girl was missing and seen by a relative roaming around 44550-2025 (O&M) per the statement of the prosecutrix dated 04.09.2024 it was alleged that prosecutrix was forcibly taken away by petitioner on bike where she was asked to change her clothes in the thereafter both visited a hotel where and in the meanwhile prosecutrix’s aunt called the petitioner to come back. Moreover, while returning, the petitioner behind the roadside bushes and misbehaved the petitioner submits that it is inconceivable that if the prosecutrix was taken away forcibly, she would not raised an alarm and instead follow the petitioner’s instructions. There were no allegations of sexual assault at that stage. It was only during her testimony before the Court on much after the alleged incident that she improvised she was sexually assaulted. Per contra, learned counsel for the State relies upon the report of the petitioner conducted on 04.09.2024, which is based on the history provided by the prosecutrix. Learned counsel for the petitioner the medical report is also incorrect and contradicts the prosecutrix’s testimony. In the medical report, it is recorded that prosecutrix in her initial testimony stated that Heard learned counsel for both parties. As per the allegations in the FIR, there is no mention of sexual assault. The FIR only states that the girl was missing and seen by a relative roaming around with the petitioner -2- per the statement of the prosecutrix dated 04.09.2024 it was alleged that taken away by petitioner on bike to the bus stand, hes in the washroom of the bus where only petitioner went inside and in the meanwhile prosecutrix’s aunt called the petitioner to the petitioner took the prosecutrix misbehaved and molested her. Counsel for the petitioner submits that it is inconceivable that if the prosecutrix was taken away forcibly, she would not raised an alarm and instead follow the here were no allegations of sexual assault at that stage. It was only during her testimony before the Court on 02.04.2025 that she improvised her version and claimed sel for the State relies upon the of the petitioner conducted on 04.09.2024, which is based on Learned counsel for the petitioner at this stage, submits that and contradicts the prosecutrix’s it is recorded that she has been violated, prosecutrix in her initial testimony stated that she was molested. Heard learned counsel for both parties. ions in the FIR, there is no mention of sexual assault. The FIR only states that the girl was missing and prosecutrix was the petitioner on his motorcycle and per the statement of the prosecutrix dated 04.09.2024 it was alleged that , of the bus petitioner went inside and in the meanwhile prosecutrix’s aunt called the petitioner to utrix . Counsel for the petitioner submits that it is inconceivable that if the prosecutrix was taken away forcibly, she would not raised an alarm and instead follow the here were no allegations of sexual assault at that 02.04.2025 and claimed sel for the State relies upon the of the petitioner conducted on 04.09.2024, which is based on submits that and contradicts the prosecutrix’s has been violated, ions in the FIR, there is no mention of sexual was and MANJU 2025.09.24 18:37 I agree to specified portions of this document CRM-M-44550 as per the prosecutrix initial testimony it was alleged that the the prosecutrix behind some bushes and misbehaved with her prosecutrix her relative was only on 02.04.2025, during her deposition before the Court that she improvised and intervening night of 14 relationship with the prosecutrix’s aunt 8. shows that the petitioner has been in custody for 1 year and 17 days. She could not deny the fact that all material witnesses the petitioner has already 9. fact that the petitioner is in custody since 06.09.2024 and the take long time petitioner in custody. 10. allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail any other case, subj satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned. He however, be released on the following conditions: i. ii. 44550-2025 (O&M) as per the prosecutrix initial testimony it was alleged that the the prosecutrix behind some bushes and misbehaved with her got scared and resisted, and while returning, she was seen by and there were no allegations of penetrative was only on 02.04.2025, during her deposition before the Court that she improvised and levelled allegtions that petitioner has committed intervening night of 14-15 July, 2024 and alleged that the petition relationship with the prosecutrix’s aunt (chachi). Learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate, which shows that the petitioner has been in custody for 1 year and 17 days. She could not deny the fact that all material witnesses the petitioner has already undergone incarceration for more than one year. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the the petitioner is in custody since 06.09.2024 and the long time, hence, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in custody. Without commenting upon the merits, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail any other case, subject to furnishing of bail satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned. He however, be released on the following conditions: The petitioner shall declare his and the mobile number used by him The petitioner will not switch off his -3- as per the prosecutrix initial testimony it was alleged that the petitioner took the prosecutrix behind some bushes and misbehaved with her to which got scared and resisted, and while returning, she was seen by legations of penetrative sexual assault. It was only on 02.04.2025, during her deposition before the Court that she that petitioner has committed rape on alleged that the petitioner is in a (chachi). Learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate, which shows that the petitioner has been in custody for 1 year and 17 days. She could not deny the fact that all material witnesses have been examined and undergone incarceration for more than one year. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the the petitioner is in custody since 06.09.2024 and the trial is likely to , no useful purpose would be served by keeping the Without commenting upon the merits, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail, if not required in bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate, concerned. He/she shall, however, be released on the following conditions: The petitioner shall declare his/her ordinary place of residence and the mobile number used by him/her. will not switch off his/her mobile and in case of petitioner took to which got scared and resisted, and while returning, she was seen by assault. It was only on 02.04.2025, during her deposition before the Court that she rape on er is in a Learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate, which shows that the petitioner has been in custody for 1 year and 17 days. She have been examined and After hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the trial is likely to , no useful purpose would be served by keeping the Without commenting upon the merits, the present petition is , if not required in to the shall, ordinary place of residence mobile and in case of MANJU 2025.09.24 18:37 I agree to specified portions of this document CRM-M-44550 iii. iv. 11. imposed in addition to Section 12. expression of opinion on the merits of the case and this orde considered as parity 13. in any such activity once again, the present concession granted shall automatically stand vacated. 14. September 24, 2025 manju Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether Reportable: 44550-2025 (O&M) any technical glitch, he/she has to give an alternate number, which will be available in his absence. The petitioner will mark his/her concerned, after every 15 days and in case the SHO refuses to mark his/her presence, he/she is permitted to make an application before the Illaqa Magistrate, concerned. The petitioner will not leave the country without t permission of the Court, for which he his/her passport also. However, in case, the petitioner does not possess a passport, then he/she shall file an undertaking to the said effect from being released. The petitioner shall abide by the terms and conditions as imposed in addition to Section 483 of BNSS, 2023 (Section 439 Cr.P.C.) However, nothing stated above shall be construed as a final expression of opinion on the merits of the case and this orde considered as parity qua any other co-accused in any manner whatsoever. It is made clear that, in case, the petitioners are found in any such activity once again, the present concession granted shall automatically stand vacated. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. September 24, 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether Reportable:- Yes/No -4- has to give an alternate number, which will be available in his absence. /her presence before the SHO concerned, after every 15 days and in case the SHO refuses to is permitted to make an application before the Illaqa Magistrate, concerned. will not leave the country without the prior permission of the Court, for which he/she will submit the copy of However, in case, the petitioner does not possess a passport, then he/she shall file an undertaking to the The petitioner shall abide by the terms and conditions as BNSS, 2023 (Section 439 Cr.P.C.). However, nothing stated above shall be construed as a final expression of opinion on the merits of the case and this order shall not be accused in any manner whatsoever. It is made clear that, in case, the petitioners are found involved in any such activity once again, the present concession granted shall Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (ALOK JAIN) JUDGE has to give an alternate number, presence before the SHO concerned, after every 15 days and in case the SHO refuses to is permitted to make an application he prior will submit the copy of However, in case, the petitioner does not possess a passport, then he/she shall file an undertaking to the The petitioner shall abide by the terms and conditions as However, nothing stated above shall be construed as a final r shall not be involved in any such activity once again, the present concession granted shall MANJU 2025.09.24 18:37 I agree to specified portions of this document