CRM No.M-27110 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:-14.10.2010 Mohit alias Monu son of Subash Kumar ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present:- Mr.Deepak Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Shilesh Gupta, D.A.G. Punjab. M ehinder S ingh S ullar , J . (Oral) Having exercised his right of anticipatory bail and lost in the court of Addl. Sessions Judge, petitioner Mohit alias Monu son of Subash Kumar, has directed the present petition for anticipatory bail in a case registered against him, vide FIR No.147 dated 26.7.2010, on accusation of having committed the offence punishable under section 376 IPC by the police of Police Station Salem Tabri, Distt.Ludhiana, invoking the provisions of section 438 Cr.PC. 2. Succinctly, the prosecution claimed that the marriage of prosecutrix Poonam was solemnized with Puran Chand son of Sulakanla. After the solemnization of the marriage, they lived together as husband wife and two children were born out of their wedlock. According to the complainant that the petitioner used to visit her house. Once her husband gave beating, then Mohit petitioner saved her from his (husband) clutches. She developed intimacy with the petitioner. Thereafter, in February, 2010 she and petitioner became friends. He told her to leave her husband and give him divorce and he will marry her. Then, she filed a divorce petition. On 29.6.2010 thereafter, the petitioner took her at Jassian Road and developed physical relations with her. They started residing together. It was only on 1.7.2010 that the petitioner, on the pretext of taking clothes from his house, went away and did not come back. Thus, the complainant claimed that the CRM No.M-27110 of 2010 2 petitioner has cheated, did not marry her and committed rape with her in this respect. On the basis of aforesaid allegations and in the wake of statement of the complainant, the present case was registered against the petitioner in the manner indicated here-in-above. 3. Notice of the petition was issued to the State. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, having gone through the record with their valuable help and after considering the entire matter deeply, to my mind, the present petition deserves to be accepted in this context. 5. From the sequence of events narrated here-in-above, as to whether any offence of cheating or rape is made out or not, would be the moot point to be decided during the course of trial by the trial court. The learned State counsel, on instructions from HC Harjinder Singh, has stated that the petitioner has already joined the investigation and he is no longer required for further interrogation at this stage. Moreover, nothing is to be recovered from him. There is no history of previous involvement of the petitioner any such case. 6. So, taking into consideration the peculiar facts, circumstances and totality of the allegations, as discussed here-in-above and without commenting further anything on merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side during the course of the trial of the case, the present petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in the obtaining circumstances of the present case. 7. Consequently, it is directed that in the event of his arrest, the petitioner shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail and surety bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000/- to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer, subject to the conditions that (i) he shall make himself available for interrogation by the Investigating Agency as and when required; (ii) he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer and (iii) he will not leave India without prior permission of the trial CRM No.M-27110 of 2010 3 Court. 8. Needless to mention that in case, the petitioner does not cooperate or join the investigation, the prosecution would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of his bail, in this relevant connection. 14.10.2010 (Mehinder Singh Sullar) AS Judge