Mohammad Jisan Alias Katar v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision : February 06, 2025 Mohammad Jisan @ Katar ...... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ...... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASGURPREET SINGH PURI *** Present :- Mr. Anmol Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vishal Kashyap, DAG, Haryana.

*** JASGURPREET SINGH PURI, J (Oral) 1.

The present petition has been filed under Section 483 B.N.S.S. for grant of regular bail in FIR No.167 dated 25.03.2024 registered under Sections 354, 354-A , 506 IPC and Section 10 of POCSO Act at Police Station Old Industrial Area Panipat. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in custody from 26.03.2024 and the investigation of the case has been completed and challan has been presented and no prosecution witness has been examined till date. He further submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is that he has molested a 10 years old girl but it is a concocted story and he has been falsely implicated in the present case as there is enmity between the parties and submitted that considering the aforesaid custody period of the petitioner, he may be considered for grant of regular bail.

3.

On the other hand, learned State counsel has submitted that in the present case there is a direct role attributed to the petitioner and the prosecutrix in the present case was a 10 year old girl when the offence took place and the allegations so contained in the FIR are serious and grave in nature. He further submitted that even the girl has got her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C in which she has supported the prosecution version in detail. He further submits that none of the witnesses has been examined, although challan has been presented and charges have been framed, and there is likelihood that in case the petitioner is released on bail, he may influence the witnesses and may tamper with the record.

4.

I have heard the learned counsels for the parties. 5.

The custody of the petitioner is 10 months because he is in custody from 26.3.2024. As per both the learned counsel for the parties investigation of the case has been completed, challan has been presented and thereafter charges have been framed but no prosecution witness has been examined till date. A perusal of the FIR would show that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature, especially in view of the fact that the girl was of the age of 10 years only when the incident took place and she has also supported the prosecution version at the time of recording of statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Therefore without going into the merits of the case and only for the purpose of considering the grant of regular bail to the petitioner, this Court while considering the gravity of the

aforesaid offence and especially the age of the girl does not deem it fit and proper to grant bail to the petitioner.

6.

Consequently, present petition is dismissed accordingly. 7.

However, anything observed hereinabove shall not be treated as an expression of opinion on merits of the case and is only meant for the purpose of decision of present petition. February 06, 2025 ( JASGURPREET SINGH PURI) archana JUDGE