Crl. Misc. No. M-24235 of 2010 & Crl. Misc. No. M-24380 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-24235 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: September 9, 2010 Ranjit Singh @ Vicky ........Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ........Respondent And Crl. Misc. No. M-24380 of 2010 (O&M) Iqbal Mohammad @ Vicky ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ........Respondent ****** CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. J.S. Khiva, Advocate, for the petitioners. Ms. Rajni Gupta, Addl. A.G. Punjab. Mr. Kuldeep V. Singh, Advocate, for the complainant. SABINA, J. Vide this judgment both the petitions would be disposed of as they have arisen out of the same FIR. Petitioners have filed these petitions under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'Cr.P.C.') for grant of regular bail in FIR No.125 dated 29.5.2010, under Sections 363,366- A,376,120-B of Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC'), Police Station City Mansa, District Mansa. Crl. Misc. No. M-24235 of 2010 & Crl. Misc. No. M-24380 of 2010 2 The allegations against the petitioners are that they alongwith their co-accused had committed rape on the person of the prosecutrix. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners have been falsely involved in this case. The prosecutrix had earlier appeared before the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mansa in a complaint under Section 323,504 of IPC and had given her statement that her age is 20 years and had stated that her father/accused is a greedy person. She had performed marriage with Mandeep Singh @ Kala of her own free will without any pressure. A day before she was boarding the bus with her husband Mandeep Singh and she had been apprehended by the accused and he had tried to take her forcibly to his house. Learned State counsel, who is assisted by learned counsel for the complainant, on the other hand, has submitted that the prosecutrix is aged about 16 years and had made a statement before the Magistrate under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The prosecutrix had categorically stated that the petitioners alongwith their co-accused had taken her to a brick klin and where she had been detained for three days and the petitioners and their co-accused had committed rape on her person. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that the instant petition deserves dismissal. The offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioners is serious in nature. The prosecutrix has appeared before the Magistrate and had got recorded her statement under Section Crl. Misc. No. M-24235 of 2010 & Crl. Misc. No. M-24380 of 2010 3 164 Cr.P.C., wherein she had also stated that she had been forced to make her statement in a complaint under Section 323,504 IPC by the accused. She had categorically stated that she had been taken to a brick klin by the accused and the petitioners and their co-accused had committed rape on her person. Accordingly, these petitions are dismissed. (SABINA) September 9, 2010 JUDGE Anand