IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-4589 of 2011(O&M) Date of Decision: 09.03.2011 Mubarik .... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present : Mr. I.S. Saggu, Advocate for the petitioner Ms. Preeti Chaudhary, AAG Haryana 1. Whether Reporters of local papers 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? ALOK SINGH, J. (ORAL) Affidavit of ASI Puran Lal is handed over in Court which is taken on record. Statement of prosecutrix was recorded by Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.) cum JMIC, F.P. Jhirka on 20.10.2010. Prosecutrix has stated as under:- “Stated that on the 29th day of the eighth month Mubarik who is resident of Doha called me on the road. I went to the road on his asking. He met me. A vehicle was parked on the road. Haroon and Mubarik were sitting in the vehicle. I sat in it of my own will. Mubarik took me to Alwar. I did not stop him. The vehicle was being driven by Haroon. Haroon after leaving us at Alwar came back. Mubarik did bad act with me at Alwar. I did not stop him from doing bad act. I had gone with him of my own sweet Crl. Misc. No. M-4589 of 2011(O&M) 2 will. Mubarik had also taken me to other places. I did not resist. I had gone of my own will. Everything happened with my consent. Mubarik is not at any fault. Even now I want to go with Mubarik.” Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that from the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., no offence under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC is made out. Learned counsel has further argued that as per the medical report, age of the prosecutrix was found to be about 17 years, therefore, she was able to give her consent for physical relation. Learned counsel has further argued that in a statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she has specifically stated that she has not objected physical relationship with him. Ms. Preeti Chaudhary, AAG Haryana has vehemently argued that since prosecutrix was found to be less than 18 years of age and was not major, therefore, her consent is meaning less. Since prosecutrix was about 17 years of age and she has gone at her own sweet will and had never objected making physical relationship with him, therefore, I allow this petition. Let petitioner be released on bail to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. (ALOK SINGH) 09.03.2011 JUDGE reena