High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRA-S/3208/2023allowed

Arjun v. State Of Haryana

2024-03-19Mrs. Justice Manisha Batra7 pages

!" !#"$%&' ( ( )*+ ,

-.+-/

!. !0%1. $"

. %

! .

Mr. Tarun Sharma, Advocate for the complainant. """

. % /$2!13 #

$ $

% &

'()('('* &

&&% +,-.

(/(0'('* %&

&*/1 ' -(1-(. ')',&

2 )01( 3,24

#&$ & &

).0. $ 325#

$ & 6

% $ ' 6

6 &

& $

$ &6& ' 7&

6 & +, %&

$ &

% $

%&%

6 &

% &

$ '(')#

$ 6 %& #

& &%&

6 &&

% 9

&6 6

: &% $

&% & &%

$6 9&%6& 6 9 &

& 6 &

relations with her by pressurizing her to do so. Subsequently, in the month of August, 2023, he made a call to her, expressing inability to perform marriage with her by saying that since the victim belongs to scheduled caste and he was of different caste, therefore, marriage between them was not possible. When the victim objected to the same, he started hurling abuses to her, insulted her in the name of her caste and extended threats to her. On these allegations, FIR was registered. Investigation proceedings were initiated. The medical examination of victim was conducted. Her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. was recorded and she also demarcated the places wherein the appellant had taken and ravished her. The father of the appellant was booked for commission of offence punishable under Section 212 of IPC and is presently facing trial. The appellant had filed an application for grant of anticipatory bail before the learned trial Court which had been dismissed by the impugned order which has been challenged before this Court. 3.

Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the relationship between the victim and himself was totally consensual in nature from the last one and half years. He had expressed disinclination to marry the prosecutrix subsequently as he had never made any promise to marry her but the victim who was very much interested in marrying him, had

implicated him falsely in this case. It is submitted by him that neither of the provisions of SC/ST Act has been attracted in this case nor offence under Section 376(2)(n) of IPC has been made out as against him as it was a case of consensual relationship between the parties. It is argued by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is ready to join the investigation. His custodial interrogation is not required. While passing the impugned order, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, did not apply his judicious mind and failed to distinguish 'rape' and 'consensual coitus' between the parties. With these broad submissions, it is urged by him that the impugned order is liable to be set aside, the appeal deserves to be accepted and the appellant deserves to be extended benefit of pre-arrest bail. 4.

Status report has been filed by respondent-State. Learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant has argued that there are specific and serious allegations against the appellant. He repeatedly ravished the prosecutrix who belongs to schedule caste category on the pretext of and by making promise to marry her and subsequently refused to perform marriage with her. He also extended threats to her and insulted her. But for the promise to marry being given by the petitioner, the complainant would never have consented to involve in sexual relationship with him. It is further argued that learned trial Court had rightly dismissed the application of the appellant, keeping in view the gravity of the offences and therefore, it is urged that the appeal does not deserve to be allowed. 5.

Counsel for the parties have been heard at considerable length. 6.

At the outset, it is profitable to say that t 4$ 6

% &%

$ & 3

# % $

! " # $ % & '(

&%6

& $

& &

$ &6

&6 % &%

&6 &

) & &%

9 & &

&% &

$ &%

# $

;

* #

9 &

&% &

The nature and gravity of the accusation and the exact role of the accused must be properly comprehended before arrest is made;

The antecedents of the applicant including the fact as to whether the accused has previously undergone imprisonment on conviction by a Court in respect of any cognizable offence; The possibility of the applicant to flee from justice; The possibility of the accused's likelihood to repeat similar or the other offences.

Where the accusations have been made only with the object of injuring or humiliating the applicant by arresting him or her.

Impact of grant of anticipatory bail particularly in cases of large magnitude affecting a very large number of people. The courts must evaluate the entire available material against the accused very carefully. The court must also clearly comprehend the exact role of the accused in the case. The cases in which accused is implicated with the help of sections 34 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, the court should consider with even greater care and caution because over implication in the cases is a matter of common knowledge and

concern;

While considering the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, a balance has to be struck between two factors namely, no prejudice should be caused to the free, fair and full investigation and there should be prevention of harassment, humiliation and unjustified detention of the accused; + The court to consider reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witness or apprehension of threat to the complainant;

+ Frivolity in prosecution should always be considered and it is only the element of genuineness that shall have to be considered in the matter of grant of bail and in the event of there being some doubt as to the genuineness of the prosecution, in the normal course of events, the accused is entitled to an order of bail.

# $

& & $

&&6

& 6

< / !&%$

+,& &

& 6

& &6

# & % & :

&& & 6

&6= 6$ '(')

% '('*# &:

% &

6& 6 &

$ & $

6& 6 $ &%%& $

& & &

&6&

& & $

$ &% :

6 prima facie

& &

> & &

&% & 66&&

4 6

6 ?# %

& &%

$ & & &$

> &

& &43

6& 43$

6& 4

& $ & $

% 6

& $ $

& & &

9 &

+,&

&: :

$ & $ %& 6& &

& 6 $

$ % &

&6 & % $ $ & $ 6& 6 6$ &

: &

& $ &

9 &%

&&% &

& & &

0 @

& & 6 $

& 2 &&

> &

& &

6& 6 $

& & 6&%6 & % &

&& $

& &

&* ' 25#

& $

& 6

&6& %

& $

$$ &%

$ 6 & &&

5 prima facie

&% ;

$ 6

$ & &

& )0

25#

& &

$ & $ $ &

6 9&% &&

6 &

& &

2 &

6 & &

$ % &

subject to compliance of following conditions:

He shall appear before the Investigation Officer/Arresting Officer within a period of ten days from today and furnish bonds to his satisfaction;

He shall join investigation as and when called for; 3.

He shall not directly or indirectly contact the prosecutrix, her family members or any other person/witness acquainted with the facts of the case and in case of receipt of any complaint from the prosecutrix in this regard, the protection granted by this Court shall stand cancelled.

. &

6 &

$ &6& &%

& & & &

6. % 7 $"( -.+-/

1. Whether speaking/ reasoned :

Yes / No

2. Whether reportable :

Yes / No