CRM No. M-20075 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No. M-20075 of 2011 Decided on:- 19.07.2011 Jai Kishan and another ......Petitioners Versus State of Haryana .......Respondent Coram Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.M.S.Bedi Present: Mr. K.S.Dhaliwal, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Shalini Attri, DAG, Haryana. **** M.M.S.Bedi, J(Oral) This is a petition for grant of pre-arrest bail by police officials who had allegedly misused their position having been conspired with prosecutrix Shivani to falsely implicate Narinder Rana in a case of rape under Section 376 IPC. Said Shivani was allegedly apprehended in proceedings under Section 109 Cr. P.C. Counsel for the petitioners has vehemently argued that Shivani was apprehended on 15.5.2011 as is apparent from the Kalandra Annexure P2. She was not in touch with petitioners on 14.5.2011 whereas FIR dated 24.5.2011 contains the allegations that Shivani was raped by Narinder Rana on 14.5.2011. I have heard counsel for the petitioners and carefully gone through the entire police file. It will not be appropriate to express opinion on the various steps taken during the course of investigation but is sufficient to observe that Suresh Singh, uncle of Narinder Rana and Narinder Rana himself have furnished affidavits against the petitioners regarding their involvement in the offences in connivance with Shivani. The conversation between Shivani and the petitioners is clear indication of the intimacy of the prosecutrix with the petitioners. The connivance of the petitioners with prosecutrix is prima facie apparent from the said telephonic conversation which is part of the record. The other evidence collected is not required to be discussed lest it CRM No. M-20075 of 2011 -2- should not prejudice rights of the petitioners. No extra ordinary circumstance exists to grant the concession of bail as the said relief, if given, the petitioners will not permit the investigating agency to fairly investigate the matter, petitioners being police officials. Petition is dismissed. This order, however, will not be considered as an expression of opinion on merits, for any purposes, in case the petitioners apply for concession of regular bail. Police file has been returned to State counsel. (M.M.S.Bedi) 19.07.2011 Judge mamta