Harjinder Kaur v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH ***** CRM-M No.15077 of 2022 Date of Decision : 25.1.2023 Harjinder Kaur ..... Petitioner versus State of Punjab ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA

Present:

Mr. Ritesh Pandey, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Kunal Vinayak, AAG, Punjab assisted by Mr. K.S. Bal, Advocate, for the complainant --- TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA J. (ORAL):

This is a petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.10 dated 16.1.2022 under Sections 363, 366-A and 120-B IPC registered at Police Station Qadian, Tehsil Batala, District Gurdaspur.

The petitioner herein is mother of the main accused Prince, who is stated to have allured the complainant's daughter aged about fifteen years ten months. The allegations as per the FIR are that on 15.1.2022, the complainant did not find her daughter at home and started searching for her. She reached the adjacent house of Prince, whereupon his mother also came out. The complainant found that her daughter and Prince were in a room. Her daughter did not respond to the complainant's calls. Thereupon, the petitioner asked the complainant to go home and that she would send her daughter back. The complainant, accordingly, returned home.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has no role in the entire incident as the complainant's daughter accompanied the petitioner's son of her own. The boy and the girl were recovered from a place in ASHWANI KUMAR 2023.01.25 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M No.15077 of 2022 -2Uttar Pradesh on 25.4.2022. Girl's statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded on 24.7.2022, wherein she categorically stated to have accompanied the petitioner's son of her own and wanted to stay with him too. It is further submitted that trial of the case is not progressing since an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the complainant on completion of examination-in-chief of the prosecutrix and the petitioner remains in custody since 25.2.2022. It is also submitted that the victim has refused her medical examination, therefore, there is no medical evidence on record. Learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant, on instructions from ASI Dilbag Singh, opposes the grant of bail by submitting that trial of the case is going on and the prosecutrix's statement has been partly recorded. He, however, is not able to dispute the facts aforestated.

In this background when trial of the case is not progressing on account of the application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. having been filed by the complainant and examination-in-chief of the prosecutrix is over, no purpose will be served by keeping the petitioner in custody during pendency of the trial, which is not likely to conclude in near future. In view thereof, the petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on her furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate.

(TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA) JUDGE 25.1.2023 Ashwani Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No ASHWANI KUMAR 2023.01.25 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document