The Punjab and Haryana HC was dealing with the petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR lodged under Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Sections 363, 342 and 34 IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that a false and fabricated case has been foisted upon the petitioner as no allegation was levelled against the petitioner by the victim, aged 12 years, in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. He submitted that it was only subsequently in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. for the first time, she levelled allegations of wrong doing against the petitioner. It has been submitted that it is evident that since there was no medical evidence to corroborate the allegation levelled against the petitioner, he deserved to be released on regular bail.
The learned counsel for the state has submitted that there are serious and specific allegations levelled against the petitioner of having committed rape upon a 12-year-old girl. It has been submitted that the factum of rape having been committed upon the victim stands duly corroborated from the MLR of the victim i.e., soon after her recovery. She has further submitted that the victim remained missing for two days and in her second statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she had levelled specific allegations against the petitioner of violating her person. Learned counsel has placed on record her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. wherein the victim has given vivid detail of the sequence of events right from the time she went missing and till her recovery. Learned counsel has also submitted that since the charges have not yet been framed and prosecution evidence also has not yet commenced, the petitioner may not be extended the concession of bail as there is every likelihood that he could influence material witnesses and also abscond.
After the submissions made by both the parties the HC observed that “there are serious and specific allegations against the petitioner of having violated the person of a 12-year-old girl for which he does not deserve the concession of bail.”
The HC dismissed the petition.
Bench: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul
Case Title: Sohit Kumar v. State of Haryana
Case Details: CRM-M-22126-2021
Picture Source :
