Sachin v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of decision:15.6.2020 SACHIN .....Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA .....Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL

Present:

Mr. Ravi Malik, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Aditi Girdhar, AAG, Haryana.

(the aforesaid presence is being recorded through video conferencing since the proceedings are being conducted in Virtual Court) **** GURVINDER SINGH GILL , J. (ORAL)

1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking grant of regular bail in a case registered against him FIR No.323 dated 26.10.2019 under Section 10 POCSO Act at Police Station Farakur.

2. The FIR in question was registered at the instance of Vivek Kumar wherein it has been alleged that his daughter aged about 8 years is studying in Class-III in Mukund Lal Public School, Sarojini Colony and that she commutes to the school by private school van of Ashok Kumar which is driven by Sachin (petitioner). It is alleged that on 25.10.2019

( 2 ) when her daughter returned back home on school van she looked very scared and disclosed to her mother that Sachin commits wrong acts with her and that when she was returning back from the school then the said Sachin asked her to sit in front of the van and when all the other children were left, he opened zip of his trouser and said "Chizi Dekh Lo". It is further stated therein that her daughter said that act had been committed by the petitioner on three different occasions.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that very vague allegations have been levelled in the FIR and even if same are taken as correct it cannot be said that any kind of physical harm had been caused to the complainant's daughter. Learned counsel has further submitted that since the petitioner has been behind bars since last 7 1⁄2 months, he in any case deserves the concession of bail.

4. Opposing the petition, learned State counsel has submitted that in view of the serious nature of the allegations, the petitioner does not deserve any concession of bail. It has been informed that in the present case 9 out of the 13 cited PWs have already been examined and as such since the trial is virtually at its fag end, there is no case for grant of bail to the petitioner at this stage.

5. I have considered rival submissions addressed before this Court. Keeping in view the gravity of the offence and the fact that the trial is nearing conclusion, this Court does not find any ground for release of the petitioner on bail. The petition as such is dismissed. However the trial Court shall endeavour to dispose of the trial expeditiously provided the

( 3 ) circumstances and the cause list in the view of the prevalent conditions permits fixing any short dates.

6. The petition stands dismissed with the aforesaid observations. ( GURVINDER SINGH GILL) 15.6.2020 JUDGE Gaurav Sorot Whether reasoned / speaking?

Yes / No Whether reportable?

Yes / No