Manjit Kaur @ Golo v. State Of Punjab

In The High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh CRM-M-27572-2020 (O&M) Date of Decision:-22.2.2021 Manjit Kaur @ Golo ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ... Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL Present:- Mr. Tarun Singla, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ajay Pal Singh Gill, DAG, Punjab, assisted by ASI Akshay Kumar.

***** GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J.(Oral) 1.

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking grant of regular bail in respect of a case registered vide FIR No.71 dated 16.4.2019 at Police Station Canal Colony, Bathinda, District Bathinda under Sections 363, 366-A, 370, 372, 373, 376 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code, Section 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Sections 3, 4 and 5 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention Act 1956).

2.

The FIR was lodged at the instance of victim aged 16 years, wherein it is alleged that she was forced into prostitution by the accused Manjit Kaur @ Golo, Simarjit, Prince Soni, Priya Soni @ Mahi and Kajal. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that a false FIR has been lodged against the petitioner and that since identically situated co-accused PANKAJ KAKKAR 2021.02.22 16:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

( 2 ) CRM-M-27572-2020 (O&M) namely Shilpi @ Kajal and Simarjit Kaur @ Poonam have already been granted bail by this Court, the petitioner also deserves the same concession particularly when she is not even involved in any other case. 4.

Opposing the petition, learned State counsel has submitted that since serious allegations have been levelled against the accused and the victim is a minor, no case for grant of bail is made out. Learned State counsel has not disputed the fact that identical situated co-accused namely Shilpi @ Kajal and Simarjit Kaur @ Poonam have since been granted bail by this Court vide orders dated 5.10.2020 and 4.11.2020 passed in CRM-M-2367 of 2020 and CRM-M-34270 of 2020, respectively. Learned State counsel has, however, informed that the petitioner as on date has been behind bars since the last more than 7 months and is not involved in any other case and that as on date 9 out of cited 16 PWs have been examined.

5.

I have considered rival submissions addressed before this Court. 6.

Having regard to the nature of allegations and particularly bearing in mind the fact that identically situated co-accused have already been granted bail by this Court, the petitioner also deserves the same concession on grounds of parity particularly in view of the fact that she is not stated to be involved in any other case. The petition, as such, is accepted and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on her furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned.

22.2.2021 ( Gurvinder Singh Gill ) pankaj Judge Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No PANKAJ KAKKAR 2021.02.22 16:00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document