IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Cr.M.P (M) No. 146/2010 Date of decision: 12. 3. 2010 Dhan Dev …..Petitioner Versus State of H.P. ……Respondent Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, J. Whether approved for reporting ?1 . For the petitioner: Mr. G.R. Palsara, Advocate For the respondent : Mr. Anshul Bansal, Addl. Advocate General with Mr. J.S. Rana, Assistant Advocate General Surinder Singh (Oral) Heard. Petitioner has approached this court under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking bail in FIR No. 132 of 2009 dated 15.2.2009, under Section 376 Indian Penal Code registered in Police Station Gohar. The challan has been presented in the court. In short, prosecution story is that the prosecutrix was returning to her village after attending tailoring classes from Cheuni Centre along with Ms. Asha Gulzari. Tara Chand accused was also with them. Near Nag Dhar, petitioner caught hold of her arms and asked her as to 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? - 2 - what article she had wrapped in her duppata. She told that these were onions. On this, he expressed that he thought that apples were there and he wanted to eat it. When this conversion was going on, Asha and Gulzari etc. went ahead. Finding her alone, petitioner gagged her mouth and committed rape. Thereafter both of them started their journey towards their separate houses. Other companions were not seen anywhere. When the prosecutrix reached near her house, respondent again blocked her path and took her to the bushes, again committed rape. She raised hue and cry but nobody came for her rescue. The respondent is alleged to have threatened her with dire consequences. It had become dark, she narrated the entire incident to her parents. Next morning, FIR was lodged. Prosecutrix was got medically examined. Vaginal swabs and her wearing apparels were taken, sealed and sent for forensic examination. Blood stains were found on the trouser and vaginal swab, as per the report of forensic science Laboratory. Looking to the aforesaid facts prima facie, I do not find that the petitioner has a case for bail. Accordingly, his bail application is dismissed. March 12, 2010 (Surinder Singh), (cm) Judge