Ajay Kumar Alias Bunty v. State Of Punjab
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
!"
#$ % &"'(
)* +*, %( (-
.
)"'
&
'
(/-%
0
/ '1&#- %
"%($- / )--( " --2 '
Present :
Mr. Abhayjeet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Sakshi Bakshi, AAG, Punjab.
***** / )--( " --2 '
!
"
#$%$
"# $%$
&
'(
)* ++, +
!
- --. (%$ /
)-(%$
"
%0$0 + 1 %
2 ! %
$ 2!
0 ++) + "
$ !
3 42 !
!
5 !
-" $%$ + + +
+ +
!
-"$%$ 5
!
5 ! "+ +
'25
6
5
7 &
8
!
5
)
+& &
!
)-(%$
"
%0$0 +
&
&
$ ! $..*##+,9 +
+
/5! %.-1
+ + + "
:0
!
9 !
5 & &
+ + + "
!
5 )+ + "
!
! ! &
!
-"$%$
&
!
5
#+ + " 2 ! !
!
/5!%."1
0
+
;!& + "
!
&
!
<
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is a married individual having 3 children out of the wedlock. In the initial statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the prosecutrix had given correct version, however subsequently another statement was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. on 11.10.2023 and on the basis of the said subsequent statement, the petitioner is being falsely implicated in this case. He further contends that the prosecutrix has clarified in her affidavit dated 06.02.2024 (Annexure P-4) that the initial statement was correctly recorded. He submits that even the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana had initially granted interim relief to the petitioner vide order dated 07.10.2023. The petitioner is still ready to join the investigation. 4.
Learned State counsel has opposed the bail on the ground of gravity of allegations against the petitioner.
5.
I have considered the aforesaid submissions and perused the paperbook. 6.
The first petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. was dismissed as withdrawn as per the order dated 08.11.2023 (Annexure P-5) passed by this Court.
The second petition was again filed on behalf of the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail. The said second bail petition was dismissed on merits vide order dated 22.11.2023 (Annexure P-6) by this Court. At the time of dismissal of the second petition vide order dated 22.11.2023 (Annnexure P-6), both the statements under Section 164 Cr.P.C. were already recorded. It was also noticed that the victim was sent to Nari Niketan. The petitioner is relative of the victim and the victim is a minor. The alleged history of sexual harassment was found recorded in the medical examination report of the victim. It was also observed that the Forensic Science Laboratory report regarding examination of the vaginal swabs was pending while dismissing the petition. It was observed that legality or illegality of both the statements recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is matter of trial. However, petition was dismissed on the ground of serious allegations of sexual assault upon the minor victim by the petitioner. 7.
There is no change of circumstance after the dismissal of the second bail petition.
8.
Consequently, the present petition has no merits and is accordingly dismissed.
,
!
/1 &
/ )--( " --2 '
"4-
%=
>
? 9 @9
Whether reportable Yes/No