Crl. Rev. No.509 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Rev. No.509 of 2008 Date of Decision: 23.02.2010 Bhupinder Kaur ....Petitioner Versus The State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM : Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present:- Mr. Kuldeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.S. Pannu, D.A.G., Punjab ***** 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? ** NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. (ORAL) This is a revision against the impugned Order dated 22.09.2007 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Ropar, vide which, the respondent No.2 was discharged of an offence under Sections 363, 366-A, 376 along with Section 120-B of I.P.C. in case FIR No.75 dated 16.02.2007. The allegations, as recorded by the Sessions Judge, Ropar, against the accused are that “on 22.01.2007, the prosecutrix aged about 15 ½ years daughter of complainant Bhupinder Kaur had gone to her school namely Paragon School, Kharar and came back late in the evening at 8 p.m. She revealed that Zora Singh son of Narata Singh had taken her Crl. Rev. No.509 of 2008 2 away on his bullet motor cycle at the house of sister of said Zora Singh, Balbir Kaur wife of Jasa Singh. He expressed his desire to marry her. On 07.02.2007, at about 7 p.m., the daughter of the complainant was found missing from her house and the girl could not be traced despite search and enquiry from the relatives as well as Harbans Kaur mother of accused Zora Singh. On 15.02.2007, at about 7 p.m., Zora Singh made a telephone call at their house and asked the complainant to take her daughter from his house. The complainant went to the house of accused Zora Singh and found accused Zora Singh, his mother Harbans Kaur and her daughter there. On asking her daughter she disclosed to the complainant that on 07.02.2007, at about 7 p.m., Zora Singh had taken her to his house on the promise that he will marry her and after discussing something with his mother, he had taken her on his motor cycle to one Kothi in Mohali and committed rape with her against her wishes.” The Sessions Judge, Ropar, vide Order dated 22.10.2007, summoned Zora Singh under Sections 363, 366-A and 376 IPC and the charges were framed against him. However, the accused Harbans Kaur was discharged of the said offence. From the reading of the FIR, it is apparent that an offence under Sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC cannot be said to be made out against Harbans Kaur, in as much as, it was Zora Singh himself who had called the complainant i.e. the mother of the prosecutrix to the house to take her away. There is no allegation against Harbans Kaur that she was a party to any evil design of her son. Even from the reading of the statement of Mandeep Kaur, it appears that Mandeep Kaur had herself accompanied Zora Singh to the house of his mother. There is no indication that the prosecutrix Mandeep Kaur was being forcibly kept in the house. There is also nothing to suggest that Harbans Kaur was instrumental in the commission of an offence under Section 376 of I.P.C alleged against her Crl. Rev. No.509 of 2008 3 son. No ground to interfere in the Order dated 22.09.2007 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Ropar, is made out. The revision is, accordingly, dismissed. However, anything contained herein shall have no bearing on the trial of the other co-accused pending before the Sessions Judge, Ropar. (NIRMALJIT KAUR) 23.02.2010 JUDGE gurpreet