Ranjeet v. State Of Haryana




 



 

  

 



 

  

 



 

  

 



 

 

   
   
   
  


CRM-M-17317-2025


 


 !" !#
RANJEET
 $
% STATE OF HARYANA



















 & ' 

(

(

(

( 







 )*
( +
 )*
( +
 )*
( +
 )*
( +
 + 
(  
  + 
(  
  + 
(  
  + 
(  

$   
($
 +
,-
'.
$
/
& $

($
% 0
+ -
 -
$0 

11111
(  
-

2 $34 (  
-

2 $34 (  
-

2 $34 (  
-

2 $34
1.

Petitioner has filed instant petition under Section 483 of /$0
5$6
+7$6 /
+ /-
!8 for grant of regular bail in FIR No.272 dated 05.06.2024 under Section 346 IPC (Sections 363, 366-A, 376

(2) (n) of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act were added and Section 346 IPC deleted) registered at Police Station Hodal, District Palwal (Annexure P-1).
2.

As per facts of the case, complainant gave his statement that his daughter went out for work on 30.05.2024 at about 6 pm and did not return home. He tried to search her whereabouts but failed and finally the matter was reported to the police.


As per status report, during investigation on 22.08.2024 both parents named Ranjit Kumar as accused who enticed away the victim. Offence under Sections 363 and 366A IPC were added and offence under Section 346 IPC was deleted. On 23.09.2024, it was informed that the victim was present at Child Welfare Committee, Branch Hathras. Custody of the victim was obtained and she was joined in investigation. Offence under Sections 376 (2) (n) IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act were added. Accused was arrested on 24.09.2024.

3.

Learned counsel for petitioner argued that all allegations levelled against him are false. Petitioner and the victim had solemnized marriage on 01.06.2024. Photographs of marriage are Annexure P-2. This fact is confirmed by the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. (Annexure P-3). Statement of the victim was recorded in the Court as PW4 (Annexure P-4) where she again did not support the prosecution version. Without considering the aforesaid factual position, regular bail application filed by the petitioner was wrongly declined by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Special Court (Fast Track), POCSO, Palwal vide order dated 27.02.2025 (Annexure P-5). It is argued that trial in this case may take some time. Petitioner is ready to abide by the terms of bail order. Therefore, his regular bail petition may be allowed. 4.

Detailed status report has been filed. It is pointed out that during investigation, victim was taken for medical examination. Copy of her MLR is Annexure R-1. Her statement was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C.,

8
which is Annexure R-2. On completion of investigation, challan was presented on 21.12.2024. Charges were framed on 09.01.2025 and at present 04 prosecution witnesses have been examined. It is confirmed that the victim did not support the version of prosecution. 5.

I have considered the aforesaid factual position. Petitioner is behind the bars since 24.09.2024. As referred above, trial in this case is going on. Testimony of victim has been recorded as PW4 which is Annexure P-4. In the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. as well as statement recorded in the Court as PW4, she has not supported the prosecution version. However, evidence recorded before the trial Court will be considered as per law. Trial in this case may take long time. No purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars. Therefore, without expressing my mind on the merits of the case, regular 93
& 3'
90
/
& $

33,'
 '
/

$'$'

9
$3 '

93
 7$  / 5
93
9 '

 '
7$0
9 '


/
 

$3
7$:70
7'5-
 $ '

;
 ' 5
< 33 7
&&3 4-

 0-
 '
' & '

$' 530

,33

















2(  
4 2(  
4 2(  
4 2(  
4



































































  




  




  




  





 !" !#
 !" !#
 !" !#
 !" !#

'
=//$
&6 5:$  '

 :
=//$
$&$93

 :