Vikramjit Singh v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-32572-2021 Decided on : 24.11.2021 Vikramjit Singh ...... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ...... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL Present :

Mr. Ashish Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Luvinder Sofat, AAG, Punjab.

**** Manjari Nehru Kaul, J.

Instant petition has been filed under Section 439 Cr.PC for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.46 dated 29.03.2018 registered under Sections 363, 366-A, 368 IPC,1860 (Sections 3, 4 of POCSO Act added later on) at Police Station Bhikhiwind District Tarn Taran.

Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the petitioner, who has been in custody since 15.10.2018, has been falsely implicated in the case in hand. He further submits that the trial has been proceeding at the very slow pace as no prosecution witness has been examined till date. Hence, a prayer has been made to extend the concession of bail to the petitioner.

Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the prayer and submissions made by counsel opposite. He, on instructions from ASI Satwant Singh has apprised the Court that the petitioner was declared proclaimed offender on 24.05.2019 as he absconded from the Court of Illaqa Magistrate on 19.03.2019. The delay, if any, has been on account of SONIA BURA 2021.11.24 17:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh

CRM-M-32572-2021 -2conduct of the petitioner himself. It has also been submitted that there are serious allegations levelled against the petitioner of enticing away a 13 year old girl and thereafter travelling with her to various places including Amritsar and Panipat etc. Still further, State counsel has submitted that during the period when she was with the petitioner, the victim was continuously sexually assaulted by the petitioner and was recovered after six months after the petitioner left her alone at Amritsar. This Court has also been apprised that the petitioner is a man of criminal antecedents as he is involved in six other criminal cases.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

Prima facie there are not only serious and specific allegations levelled against the petitioner in the FIR in question but even in view of his criminal antecedents, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of bail. Accordingly, the present petition stands dismissed. However, it is made clear that anything observed hereinabove shall not be construed to be an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) JUDGE 24.11.2021 sonia Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No SONIA BURA 2021.11.24 17:11 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh