Crl.M.No.M 28986 of 2009 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl.M.No.M 28986 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: March 17, 2010 Raj Kumar @ Raju .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab ......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.Balbir Sewak, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, AAG, Punjab. ...... RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.100, dated 28.9.2008, under Sections 376/457/506 IPC, registered at Police Station Moonak, District Sangrur. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record carefully. The brief allegations against the petitioner-accused are that on 28.9.2008 at about 4.00 a.m., he entered the house of complainant by scaling wall of the house. On hearing noise, prosecutrix woke up and in the light of the bulb, she recognised the accused. On her enquiry as to why he had come to her house, the accused placed his hand over her mouth and pushed her on the bed by holding her arm and committed rape upon her against her wishes and thereafter he went away by opening the lock of the outer door. It has been vehemently contended by learned counsel for the petitioner-accused that prosecutrix is a married lady, having three children and that he has been falsely implicated in this case and in fact, he had gone Crl.M.No.M 28986 of 2009 (O&M) -2- to the house of the prosecutrix when he was called to repair the fault in the electricity and, however, he was illegally detained and given beatings. It has further been contended that he also filed a criminal compliant against prosecutrix and some other persons. It has also been contended that no DNA test has been conducted in this case. It has further been contended that petitioner-accused has to adduce evidence in the complaint case and has also to defend himself in this case, hence he be admitted to bail. Bail application has been vehemently opposed by learned State counsel on the plea that there are serious allegations against the petitioner- accused and that the alleged complaint is nothing but a counter-blast. It has further been contended that even alleged medical examination was got conducted at 2.15 p.m. on 28.9.2008 at Civil Hospital, Sunam, and the injuries were simple with blunt weapon. Hence, it is contended that complaint has been filed just to create defence and injuries are self suffered. It has further been contended that evidence of prosecution has already been closed and the case is fixed for recording statement of accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and, hence trial can be expedited. I have considered all the facts and circumstances of the case. The allegations against the petitioner-accused are serious in nature. Evidence of the prosecution has been closed and hence, trial can be expedited. Hence, in view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, application for regular bail filed by Raj Kumar @ Raju, is hereby dismissed being devoid of any merit. However, learned trial Court is directed to make efforts to conclude the trial within one month of the next date of hearing, i.e., 2.4.2010. 17.3.2010 (Ram Chand Gupta) meenu Judge