High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/6001/2017allowed

Rohit @ Monti v. State Of Haryana

2017-02-28Mr. Justice Fateh Deep Singh2 pages

CRM No.M-6001 of 2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-6001 of 2017 Decided on: 28.02.2017 Rohit @ Monti ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE REKHA MITTAL Present :

Mr. Anil Kumar Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. REKHA MITTAL, J. (Oral) Heard.

Notice of motion.

Mr. Vikas Malik, DAG, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.

The petitioner prays for grant of regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'Cr.P.C.') in FIR No.33 dated 25.04.2016, for offence punishable under Sections 342, 363, 366A, 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC') and Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 registered in Police Station Women, District Jhajjar.

Counsel for the petitioner would contend that the material witnesses in the case have already been examined. The prosecutrix aged about 171⁄2 years did not support the prosecution version or connect the accused with the crime. It is further submitted that as the material witnesses have already been examined, there is no possibility of the petitioner tampering with the prosecution evidence in case released on Mohd. Yakub 2017.02.28 15:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM No.M-6001 of 2017 bail.

Counsel for the State has not disputed the factual assertions but opposed the bail.

I have heard counsel for the parties, perused the paperbook particularly testimony of the material witnesses examined before the trial Court.

Without commenting upon merits of the case, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court. However, he shall abide by the following conditions:- (i) He shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and (ii) He shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.

28.02.2017 (REKHA MITTAL) yakub JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No Mohd. Yakub 2017.02.28 15:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh