Hariom v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH 216) CRM-M-43919 of 2020 Date of Decision: 07.01.2021 Hariom

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMOL RATTAN SINGH Present:- Mr. Bhisham Kumar Majoka, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Gurbir Dhillon, AAG, Haryana.

Amol Rattan Singh, J. (Oral) Case heard by video conferencing.

By this petition, filed under the provisions of Section 439 of the Cr.P.C., the petitioner seeks the concession of 'regular bail', upon FIR no.457, dated 31.10.2019, having been registered at Police Station Chadhut, District Palwal, alleging therein the commission of offences punishable under Sections 363, 366A and 376 of the IPC.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been in custody since 11.05.2020, with the trial still to effectively commence, with no prosecution witness examined so far. Upon query to the learned State counsel, he does not deny the factual position and upon further query, he also submits that as per his instructions and even as per the FIR, the complainants' daughter was 18 years of age, i.e. of the age of majority and that she had allegedly been seduced by the petitioner.

Keeping in view the above but without making any comments on the merits of the case whatsoever, the present petition is allowed, with the petitioner ordered to be enlarged on bail, upon his furnishing adequate VIKAS CHANDER 2021.01.10 12:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

216) CRM-M-43919 of 2020 -2bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/CJM/Duty Magistrate concerned.

07.01.2021 (AMOL RATTAN SINGH) vcgarg JUDGE Whether reasoned/speaking: Yes









VIKAS CHANDER 2021.01.10 12:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document