Rafiq Alias Rafik v. State Of Haryana




IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH (146) CRM-M-68698-2025 Date of Decision: 06.03.2026 RAFIQ ALIAS RAFIK ......Petitioner

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH

Present:

Mr. Sahil Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Anmol Malik, DAG, Haryana.

**** KIRTI SINGH , J. (ORAL) 1.

The jurisdiction of this Court under Section 483 of BNSS has been invoked for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 298 dated 22.09.2023 under Sections 363, 366-A, 323 and 506 IPC (lateron added Sections 323 and 506 of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act), registered at Police Station City Nuh, District Nuh, Haryana (Annexure P-1). 2.

The translated version of the FIR is reproduced below:- "ToThe S.H.O. Sahib, Police Station City NuhSubject: Application regarding my daughter being lured and taken away by an unknown person. Respected Sir, It is humbly submitted that I, the complainant Budun, son of Sh. Sonu, resident of Ward No. 03 near Ali Pradhan, Nuh, Tehsil and District Nuh, am a permanent resident of the above address. I do hawking work and I have been living in Nuh for the last 4 years. I live by making a jhuggi (temporary hut). That on 19-09-2023, I had gone for my work to different villages and when I returned home at 3:00 PM in the evening, my daughter xxxx, aged 13 years, was not present at home. My daughter has been lured and taken away by some unknown person. I searched for my daughter xxxx in the surrounding areas but could not find her anywhere.

Sir, I received a call from mobile number 8053108656, after which I tried to contact my daughter on her mobile number 989663xxxx, but her phone was switched off. Therefore, I request you to kindly register a case against the unknown person and initiate legal action. I shall be highly obliged.

 22.09.2023Complainant: Budun, son of Shri Sonu, Resident: Ward No. 03 near Ali Pradhan, Nuh Tehsil & District NuhMobile No.: 82870xxxxx" 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 20-year-old petitioner has been falsely implicated on the basis of the statement of the father of the prosecutrix, on the allegation that the petitioner had enticed away his daughter and committed sexual assault upon her. It is further submitted that the alleged incident occurred on 19.09.2023, whereas the FIR was registered after an unexplained delay of three days. The age of the prosecutrix is also a disputed question of fact. There is no cogent evidence on record to conclusively establish the guilt of the petitioner. Moreover, the material witnesses have already been examined, and all of them have turned hostile during their deposition before the learned trial Court. Learned counsel submits that the 20 year old petitioner has already undergone an actual custody of 02 years 04 months and 09 days and has clean antecedents. 4.

Per contra, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. He states that the petitioner was actively involved in the commission of the offence. He has filed custody certificate in Court today and the same is taken on record. As per custody certificate, the petitioner has undergone an actual custody of 02 years 04 months and 09 days. The learned State counsel, on instructions from official concerned, submits that in the present case, charges were framed on 31.01.2024 and out of total 29 prosecution witnesses, 20 have been examined till date. He submits that in view of the serious allegations against the petitioner, he is not entitled to the concession of regular bail. 5.

Heard the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.

6.

   

  

!  "

# !   "      #   " "  # #" "

 $

7.

B 



  

" # 

%&

'  " 

  

 





#  ( 

  )






  

    

               

     

  

   

   

        

         

    



  

  

  

   

         

     

   





  





                 

    

     

     

  



  

 

 ! 

   

    

   





 

   

 !           

 

 

  

  

 

             

      

  
  
   

   



      

   "    



     



  

   

  



 



  

 

       

  #   

  
$ #   

  

   "

" *+$ +$ ,$ -      ( #

 ."$

     

""$







"  

 

  02 years 04 months and 09 days$ /      "

 # # 

$ $ 0  

 (



#



    (

  "   

 "  #   



    



  

   1 $ + $  "



 

  

 



 ( "    $  #

  "

( $$   .

(

  

."



   #  #

   $ 0   # #   " "

  

1   # (

    # #    "



"  #

 $

     

    (  .    " 

  " 1 

    

     

   

   ( #   1 $

    

 

 +
  / (  

 

  

    "  #   $

   ( 

 

  

  (

  





1

.5

 "

%5

'  "   

 !

" #

   
$  

 ++$ 3 

(    1  !    







  ! 

6 

   

 

67     1

(  " ) 89

(

"

( $ 89

(

 :6" (89$ 89

(





 .    

 ."$ 8#9



""   "

 (

"" (  $ 8#9



 

  "  "  

"   !  (    "

    

  

"

( #$ +$ /

 #  

 "#  



  $ +*$ /

  # "  #

%

 1 

" 

 

.   "  $

+,$ 2 "

  89    $ (KIRTI SINGH) JUDGE March 06, 2026 Ritika Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No