Gulab Singh v. State Of Haryana

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : December 06, 2019 Gulab Singh ....Petitioner versus State of Haryana ....Respondent Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Fateh Deep Singh Present :

Mr. DK Tuteja, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Baljinder Virk, DAG, Haryana for the State with ASI Rakesh Mr. Vishal Nehra, Advocate, for the complainant Fateh Deep Singh, J. (Oral) CRM-37475-2019 Since the present application has been filed in compliance with orders dated 25.11.2019, the same stands allowed. Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC are ordered to be added in the head note and prayer para of the main bail application. Office to do the needful.

-2CRM-M-49014-2019 Petitioner Gulab Singh who is in judicial custody in case FIR No. 422 dated 7.9.2019, under Sections 376, 377, 506 IPC and Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC (added later on), Police Station City Gohana, District Sonepat, has sought this regular bail. The present case was got registered by the victim a woman Warder in Jail Department. It is alleged that about 5/6 years prior to the registration of the present case which took place on 7.9.2019, she came across the accused. It is alleged that the accused on the pretext of marriage developed physical relations with her and every time gave false promise of marriage but did not do so and rather threatened her with dire consequences.

Learned counsel for the petitioner inter-alia contends that both the petitioner and the complainant were grown up persons employed in government jobs and had entered into this relationship and were living in live-in-relationship.

-3showing herself to be the wife of petitioner Gulab Singh. It is contended that the petitioner is behind the bars and had never either promised to marry the complainant or backed out of it and being in live-in-relationship had represented to the people at large as to their relationship of husband and wife for which reliance is placed on photographs Annexure P/11 numbering 12.

The learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the bail on the grounds of the petitioner being trickster and fraudster wherein he had enticed and developed physical relations with the complainant and thereafter backed out of the same and in view of the heinousness of the offence and apprehension that he might influence the witnesses disentitles him to any relief. Going through the submissions as is illustrative from the various public records placed on the file, the photographs of the couple with their relatives are suggestive of acknowledgment of this relationship by the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since a long time. No useful purpose will be served by retaining him in further custody. Culpability, if any, shall be determined at the trial which is not likely to be concluded in near future. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate,

-4Sonepat.

The present petition stands disposed off accordingly. The observations made herein above shall have no bearing on the merits of the case as these are purely for the disposal of the present bail application.

( Fateh Deep Singh ) December 06, 2019 Judge 'tiwana'

Whether speaking/reasoned ?

Yes/No Whether Reportable ?

Yes/No