214 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-27187-2026 Date of decision: 27th July, 2026 Mahipal … Petitioner Versus State of Haryana & another … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE AARADHNA SAWHNEY Present: Ms. Veena Hooda, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Armaan Dahiya, AAG Haryana for the respondent/State. AARADHNA SAWHNEY, J. (ORAL) 1. Present petition for grant of bail under Section 483 BNSS has been filed by petitioner, an accused in case bearing FIR No.267 dated 08.08.2025 registered against him at Police Station Asauda, District Jhajjar (Haryana), for commission of offences punishable under Section 8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short, ‘POCSO Act’) and Sections 351(2), 74, 75(2) of BNS. 2. Facts necessary for disposal of this petition can be noticed as under:- Criminal proceedings in the present case, were initiated by XXX, permanent resident of Dahkora, by moving a complaint on 08.08.2025 pointing therein that he is blessed with two children; a son named SSS and daughter named RRR, who is presently aged about 10 years. At about 6.30 pm on 07.08.2025, his daughter (minor ‘victim’ ) had gone to the shop of the petitioner to purchase Rakhi. It is alleged that the petitioner took the minor girl inside a room, scared her, threatened her to put off her clothes, forcibly made her to lie down on a cot, touched her inappropriately on the RATTAN PAL SINGH 2026.07.30 15:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-27187-2026 2 breasts and tried to molest her private parts with his hands. When the ‘victim’ raised alarm, the accused ran away. Primarily, with this backdrop, the complainant, a distressed father requested the police authorities to catch hold of the accused as also to initiate appropriate proceedings against him. 3. On the basis of said complaint, the aforesaid FIR came to be registered against the petitioner. On 08.08.2025, minor ‘victim’ aged about 10 years was taken to Civil Hospital, Bahadurgarh but since her parents did not give their consent, she was not got medico-legally examined. On the following day, i.e. 09.08.2025, she was produced before the learned Magistrate for getting her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS, wherein also she elaborated upon the sequence of events that had unfolded in the evening of 07.08.2025, when accused had behaved in a most inappropriate manner with her. During further course of investigation, the minor ‘victim’ was got counselled by the legal-aid counsel. Petitioner was arrested on 27.08.2025, who during the course of interrogation, confessed to his involvement in the commission of offence. Statements of the witnesses were recorded at various stages of the case. On culmination of investigation, challan complete in all respect was filed in the Court. Admittedly, after the petitioner was chargesheeted, the ‘victim’ and her father (i.e. complainant) both stand examined as PW-3 and PW-4 respectively. They have supported the case of the prosecution. The ‘victim’ has given a vivid description of the events that had unfolded in the evening of 07.08.2025. RATTAN PAL SINGH 2026.07.30 15:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-27187-2026 3 After dismissal of his application for grant of bail by the learned Additional Session Judge, Jhajjar vide order dated 09.02.2026, present petition has been filed. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner, aged about 48 years, has been falsely implicated in the present case by the complainant, with whom he (P) had an on-going financial dispute. The complainant was on the lookout of an opportunity to level scores with the petitioner, to harass him as also to extract illegal monetary benefit from him (P). By way of present complaint, as per the learned counsel, facts were twisted and deliberately a criminal colour was given to the story. Taking her submissions further, learned counsel contends that in the wake of star witnesses of the prosecution story, i.e. the ‘victim’ and her father, having been already examined, there is no apprehension that the petitioner would overawe them. Further, the fact that parents of the ‘victim’ refused for her medical examination, also indicates false implication of the petitioner. When viewed in the light of the submissions advanced hereinabove, further incarceration of the petitioner, who has been in custody for the last 11 months, would be violative of his rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India more so, when the completion of trial is still likely to take some time, for out of 15 prosecution witnesses only 7 have been examined till date. Further, as per learned counsel, petitioner undertakes to abide by all the conditions so imposed by the Court, while extending the concession of bail to him. Prayer for allowing the petition has been made. 5. Per contra, while opposing the request for grant of bail to the petitioner, learned State counsel contends that in view of tender age of the ‘victim’, who has been consistent in her stand at all stages of the case and has levelled specific allegations against the petitioner, of touching her RATTAN PAL SINGH 2026.07.30 15:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-27187-2026 4 inappropriately and of sexually assaulting her, no case for grant of bail is made out. Further, the plea taken by the petitioner that on account of on- going financial dispute between him and the complainant, he has been falsely implicated, also remains unsubstantiated. In the light of seriousness and gravity of allegations levelled, no lenient view deserves to be taken in his favour. Prayer for dismissal of the petition has been made. 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record with their able assistance. 7. It is settled that grant or refusal of bail is the discretion of the Court. Factors to be kept in mind while granting the concession of bail have been discussed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in several cases. The essence being that while exercising powers under Section 439 Cr.P.C. (Pari materia to Section 483 BNSS), the Court has to take into consideration various parameters including the nature of the charge, evidence, seriousness and gravity of offence, punishments to be awarded to a person, if he is convicted, his past antecedents etc. Thus, there can be no straight jacket formula for exercising the discretion and each case has to be examined on its peculiar facts. 8. Reverting back to the facts of the case in hand, in view of the tender age of the ‘victim’, who is hardly about 10 years old and who has been consistent all through (i.e. in her statement given before the legal-aid counsel, statement under Section 183 BNSS as also the statement recorded on oath before the trial Court) with regard to the obscene acts and sexual assault committed by the petitioner upon her in the evening of 07.08.2025, while she was alone at home, no case for taking a lenient view in favour of the petitioner is made out. RATTAN PAL SINGH 2026.07.30 15:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-27187-2026 5 Moreover, in view of the provisions of Sections 29 and 30 of POCSO Act, presumption lies against the accused of having committed the offence as alleged by the prosecution, which has not been rebutted by him. That apart, it is very disturbing to note that in para No.14 of the petition, a specific averment has been made that petitioner is not involved in any other case, whereas, as per the custody certificate placed on record, the petitioner is involved in another case of serious nature bearing FIR No.334/2016 dated 17.07.2016 u/s 148/149 IPC, 307 IPC, 506 IPC, 25-54- 59 Arms Act registered at Police Station Sadar Bahadurgarh, District Jhajjar. Accordingly, without further commenting on merits of the case, else it may prejudice the mind of the trial Court, this Court is of the opinion that no case for grant of bail is made out in favour of the petitioner. The petition stands dismissed accordingly. 9. However, the trial Court is directed to expedite the proceedings. (AARADHNA SAWHNEY) JUDGE July 27, 2026 rps Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No RATTAN PAL SINGH 2026.07.30 15:08 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document