Crl. Misc. No. M-31136 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Case No. : Crl. Misc. No. M-31136 of 2011 Date of Decision : November 30, 2011 Sheela Devi .... Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab .... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL * * * Present : Mr. Sukhdeep Parmar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Chaudhary, DAG, Punjab. * * * L. N. MITTAL, J. (Oral) : Accused Sheela Devi has filed this petition for regular bail in case FIR No.59 dated 30.07.2011, under Sections 376, 313, 315, 506, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (in short – IPC), registered at Police Station Chabbewal, District Hoshiarpur. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file. The prosecutrix alleged in the FIR that she was raped by the petitioner's co-accused Tinku in April 2011. He threatened her not to disclose it to anybody. However, in July 2011, the prosecutrix felt that she was pregnant. She disclosed it to Tinku, who gave her medicine resulting in Crl. Misc. No. M-31136 of 2011 2 termination of pregnancy. The prosecutrix disclosed it to her parents on 29.07.2011. The FIR was lodged on 30.07.2011. In the supplementary statement, the prosecutrix alleged that petitioner and another co-accused Rajni @ Razi got the prosecutrix raped in collusion with Tinku and also threatened her on 29.07.2011. It was also alleged that Tinku gave the medicine to Rajni for administering it to the prosecutrix for termination of pregnancy. From the aforesaid, it is apparent that no role has been attributed to the petitioner for termination of pregnancy even in the supplementary statement. It is also not alleged as to what was the role played by the petitioner in commission of rape on the prosecutrix by Tinku, except that petitioner and Rajni got the prosecutrix raped in collusion with Tinku. The alleged threat by the petitioner to the prosecutrix was also extended on 29.07.2011 and not in April 2011, when the prosecutrix was allegedly raped by Tinku. The petitioner is in custody since 20.08.2011 i.e. for more than three months. Keeping in view the aforesaid, but without meaning to express any opinion on merits of the case, the instant bail petition is allowed. Bail to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate, Hoshiarpur. November 30, 2011 ( L. N. MITTAL ) monika JUDGE