Rahul Dhama v. State Of Haryana

CRM-M-2639-2015 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-2639-2015 Date of decision: 24.03.2015 Rahul Dhama ..... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ..... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.P. NAGRATH PRESENT: Mr. Akashdeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Dimple Jain, AAG, Haryana.

R.P. NAGRATH, J. (ORAL) This petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner for grant of regular bail in FIR No. 243 dated 28.06.2014, registered under Sections 363/366-A/120-B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) at Police Station City Sonepat, District Sonepat. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned State counsel and carefully gone through the paper-book. The charges against the petitioner and the co-accused are framed for offences under Section 363/366-A/120-B IPC. All the prosecution witnesses have since been examined. The prosecutrix was about 17 years and 10 months old at the time of incident. Learned counsel for the petitioner also filed certified copy of RISHU KATARIA 2015.03.25 12:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

CRM-M-2639-2015 -2the statement of prosecutrix (PW-8) in Court today and the same be taken on record.

According to the prosecutrix, she did not stay with the petitioner but with co-accused Sandeep and his wife. The prosecutrix admittedly knew that the petitioner is already a married person and is having a son.

Petitioner is in custody from 26.07.2014.

In view of the aforesaid circumstances and without expressing any opinion on the merits of case, it is a fit case to admit the petitioner to bail. The instant petition is allowed and the petitioner be admitted to bail on furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court. March 24, 2015 ( R.P. NAGRATH ) rishu JUDGE RISHU KATARIA 2015.03.25 12:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document