Cr.MP(M) No. 92 of 2010 24.2.2010 Present: Mr. Anup Chitkara, counsel for the petitioner. Mr. J.S. Rana, Assistant Advocate General, for the respondent. The petitioner was arrested on 6th of September, 2009 in case FIR No. 116 of 2009, registered on 6.9.2009, under Sections 376, 506 and 417 of the Indian Penal Code in Police Station, Dharampur. He failed to get his bail from the Court of Sessions, as such, instant petition under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been moved. In nut shell, the facts alleged are that the prosecutrix was independently working as a Computer Operator at Subathu. Way back in the year 2008 the petitioner requested her to load some software on his computer at his residence. She visited his place and in the presence of family members completed the jobs. Thereafter, the petitioner developed some intimacy with her and after some time, in the year 2009, petitioner again requested her to load some songs on his computer at his residence She agreed and went there. On that day none of the family members were present in the house. It is alleged that taking the benefit of loneliness the prosecutrix was sexually abused. Thereafter, the petitioner went on persuading the prosecutrix to marry him and finally she agreed for the proposal. On 17th August, 2009 both of them appeared before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Solan and executed the affidavits intending to marry each other within a month. On the same day they applied to the District Marriage Officer by moving a petition for marriage on which notice of one month was issued. In the meantime, the prosecutrix as well as the petitioner had been moving and staying together some times at Subathu, Dharampur in the hotels and also at Parwanoo in the Cr.MP(M) No. 92 of 2010 house of Sohan Lal, the maternal Uncle of the petitioner because the parents of the petitioner did not accept their marrying each other as she was not able to provide dowry. The stay of the petitioner and the prosecutrix was also managed by one Shri Soni in the Forest House at Subathu, petitioner developed physical relations with her on the pretext that they were ultimately to marry. It is alleged that on 20th of August, 2009 the prosecutrix was turned out by the sister-in-law of the petitioner named Bhawna from the house of the petitioner and left at the Solan bye-pass. Then she contacted the Additional SP. He directed her to approach “Woman Cell” and make a complaint. But again on 1st of September, 2009 she came to Additional SP and submitted a written complaint to him. The second complaint was made by her on 5th of September, 2009 to SP Solan on the basis of which the FIR was registered in the aforesaid terms. The prosecutrix was got medically examined. The petitioner was arrested on 6th of September, 2009. His medical examination was also conducted. Police recorded the statements of the witnesses and came to the conclusion that the petitioner on the assurance of marriage committed sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix without her consent. The challan has been presented in the Court for the trial of the accused-petitioner wherein the charge under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code has been framed on 6th of January, 2010 and the matter has been fixed for the evidence of the prosecution w.e.f. 9th of March, 2010 to 11th of March, 2010. Cr.MP(M) No. 92 of 2010 I have gone through the investigation file thoroughly, also one of the representation made by the Sohan Lal, the maternal Uncle of the petitioner to the Superintendent of Police, Solan and other aspects of the case and also heard the learned counsel for the parties. Against the aforesaid background, in my considered opinion, the continuous custody of the petitioner is not required. He is a permanent resident of Subathu falling within the jurisdiction of Solan district and has his roots in the society. There is no allegation of his absconding or its likelihood as such. Therefore, in my considered view, it is a fit case to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Therefore, it is ordered that the petitioner be released on bail on his executing a bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Solan and this bail shall be subject to the conditions that the petitioner:- (i) shall attend the court of learned Sessions Judge, Solan w.e.f. 9th of March, 2010 to 11th of March, 2010 on which date the case has been fixed for the evidence of the prosecution and thereafter as and when called upon to do so. (ii) shall not make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts and circumstances of this case to as to dissuade him fro disclosing such facts to the court or the Police officer. Needless to say that if the petitioner shall commit the breach of any of the conditions aforesaid, the liberty of the bail shall be cancelled. Cr.MP(M) No. 92 of 2010 Any observation made hereinabove is strictly for the disposal of this bail petition and shall not affect the merits of the case in any way. Let a copy of this order be sent to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Solan for his information and necessary action at his end. In case, the parties applies for urgent copy, it be supplied to them forthwith as per rules. The application is disposed of. (Surinder Singh), J. 24th February, 2010 (vs)