Raja Ram v. State Of Haryana

CRM-M-27812 of 2023 -12023:PHHC:081008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-27812 of 2023 Date of Decision:02.06.2023 Raj Ram .... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana .... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

Present:

Mr.Vaneet Kumar Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vipul Sherwal, AAG, Haryana ***** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J (ORAL) This is a petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for seeking regular bail in FIR No.162 dated 04.11.2022 registered under Section 201, 204, 323, 313, 328, 506, 376(2), 376 (D) IPC registered at Police Station Mansa Devi Complex, Panchkula.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the prosecutrix has not been raped by the petitioner in the FIR. Her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. wherein the petitioner name was added without any further allegations. The said allegation of petitioner having committed rape of the complainant in a room of hotel situated at Morny Road is totally different infer to the FIR.

Learned counsel for the State submits that during investigation it has come on record that the petitioner had also raped the prosecutrix. However, this Court finds that there is no independent FIR lodged. In the FIR, the allegations are only against one Vijay Kumar and his father. RAMAN KUMAR 2023.06.02 16:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-27812 of 2023 -22023:PHHC:081008 Keeping in view thereto, this Court prima facie finds that the petitioner Raja Ram cannot be made an accused in the FIR which was registered against Vijay Kumar and his father, therefore, the petitioner deserves to be granted bail subject to furnishing of bail bond with a surety of Rs.20,000/- of the like amount.

Accordingly, the petition stands allowed.

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE 02.06.2023 Raman Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No RAMAN KUMAR 2023.06.02 16:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document