Crl. Misc. No.M-32798 of 2010 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No. M-32798 of 2010 Date of Decision: November 10, 2010 Jatinder Singh …..Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab …..Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI. -.- Present:- Mr.Naresh Jain, Advocate for the petitioner. -.- M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) Petitioner seeks concession of pre-arrest bail in a case of gang rape registered at the instance of Seema Rani alleging that on the night of 22nd/ 23rd of June 2010 at about 10/11 p.m. when she had gone out for urinating, petitioner alongwith Surjit Singh and Mohinder Singh. Mohinder Singh had caught-hold of her and committed rape upon her by intoxicating her and she was taken next day in a car before she was dropped. Crl. Misc. No.M-32798 of 2010 [2] Counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner has been involved only on account of political rivalry with the father of the prosecutrix. The two witnesses whose names have been incorporated are inimical towards the family of the petitioner; one is having litigation with the mother of the petitioner and the second one has got a civil litigation pending with the father of the petitioner. It has been argued that the story of the prosecutrix is patently improbable. In order to establish the enmity of the father of the prosecutrix, reference has been made to one FIR which was earlier registered by him against the family members of the petitioner and another FIR in which the father of the prosecutrix is a witness against the petitioner in a case of assault. It is submitted that the truthfulness of the allegations mentioned in the FIR is being investigated by the police and 50 persons of the village have made statements to the person holding enquiry to the effect that no incident, as alleged by the prosecutrix has ever taken place. I have heard counsel for the petitioner. The probability of false implication in view of the circumstances mentioned cannot be ruled out but in view of the seriousness of the allegations i.e. the allegations of commission of gang rape against a minor, it will be inappropriate to exercise jurisdiction under Section 438 Cr.P.C. It has been contended by counsel for the petitioner that some incident might have happened with the complainant but the petitioner has got nothing to do with the same and that he has been falsely implicated. Crl. Misc. No.M-32798 of 2010 [3] All the pleas taken up by the petitioner may constitute a good ground for the grant of bail but at this stage when the investigation is at thresh-hold, the petition is dismissed at this stage with liberty to the petitioner to surrender or to approach this Court again on the basis of any favourable investigation report in his favour. November 10, 2010 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE