Amit Kumar v. State Of Haryana And Others




 



 

  

 



 

  

 



 

  

 



 

 

   
   
   
  


CRM-M-21570-2025 (O&M)


 


 !" #!#$
AMIT KUMAR  %
& STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER




















 ' ( 

)

)

)

) 







 *+
) ,
 , 
)  
  *+
) ,
 , 
)  
  *+
) ,
 , 
)  
  *+
) ,
 , 
)  

%   
)%
% (%
-./%
 0
(1
%
2
' %

Mr. Aditya Singla, AAG, Haryana.

Mr. Rajesh Duhan, Advocate for respondent No.2.

33333
)  
0

4 %56 )  
0

4 %56 )  
0

4 %56 )  
0

4 %56
1.

Petitioner has filed instant petition under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail in FIR No.551 dated 26.11.2024 under Sections 69, 351 (2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Karnal, District Karnal.

2.

As per facts of the case, prosecutrix namely 'PS' filed written complaint alleging that she got friendly with Amit in April, 2024 who was posted in Haryana Police, HPA, Madhuban, Karnal. He gradually trapped her in love affair and allured to perform marriage with her. She has narrated incident of 03.08.2024 when he gave her lassi laced with some intoxicants, as a result she became unconscious. Taking undue advantage, he committed

#
rape with her and also took her objectionable photographs. Thereafter, he threatened her with the said photographs and videos and subsequently called her time and again and sexually exploited her. Finally, the matter was reported to the police.
3.

Learned counsel representing petitioner pointed out that FIR has been lodged by the prosecutrix due to some misunderstanding. Talk regarding marriage was going on. Family of petitioner took some time to make a decision, as a result, this FIR has been lodged. Now the matter has been compromised and memorandum of understanding has been signed by the prosecutrix and his father dated 22.05.2025 (Annexure A-1). In pursuance of this, he is going to perform marriage with the prosecutrix. It is submitted that he will abide by the terms and conditions of bail order. Therefore, his regular bail petition may be allowed. 4.

Mr. Rajesh Duhan, Advocate appeared on behalf of respondent No.2 and did not object the regular bail petition filed by the petitioner. Aforesaid memorandum of understanding dated 22.05.2025 (Annexure A-1) is also confirmed.
5.

Status report is filed according to which after completion of investigation, challan was presented on 31.01.2025. Charges were framed on 07.03.2025. Till date, no prosecution witness has been examined. It is submitted that there are serious allegations against the petitioner. 6.

I have considered the arguments and the factual position. Prosecutrix is 28 years old lady on whose statement present FIR has been registered. Petitioner categorically stated that he was to perform marriage


with the victim but his family took some time to make a decision, as a result present FIR was registered. Now admittedly the matter has been settled between the petitioner and the prosecutrix and their respective families. No purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars. Therefore, without expressing my mind on the merits of the case, regular bail '
5(
78
2
' %

559(
 (
2

%(%(

7
%5 (

75

.%  2 :
75
7 (
 (
.%8
7 (

2
 

%5

.%;.8
.(:0
 % (

<
 ( :
/ 55 .

''5 60

 80
 (
( ' (

%( :58

955

















4)  
6 4)  
6 4)  
6 4)  
6



































































  




  




  




  





 !" #!#$
 !" #!#$
 !" #!#$
 !" #!#$

(
=22%
'> :;%  (

 ;
=22%
%'%75

 ;