Crl. Misc. No.M-4785 of 2010 Dharam Singh versus State of Punjab Present: Mr. Rajinder Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. V.S.P.Sidhu, AAG, Punjab. **** Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner seek regular bail in FIR No.432 registered against him on 13.12.2008 for the offences under Sections 363/366- A/376-120-B Indian Penal Code (IPC- for short) at Police Station Kharar, District Mohali. The FIR has been registered on the statement of Kiranjit Kaur wife of Prem Kumar. Kiranjit Kaur has stated that she has two children, one of them is a boy and the other a girl, who is 16 years old. On 23.11.2008, the complainant Kiranjit Kaur had gone to Kharar and her husband was also away from their house. The daughter (prosecutrix) of the complainant was alone at home. When the complainant came back from Kharar, she found that her daughter was missing. Despite searching for her, she could not get any clue regarding her whereabouts and she had a belief that Dharam Singh (petitioner) has enticed her away. The case was registered for kidnapping and abduction of the prosecutrix. The statement of the prosecutrix was recorded on 06.06.2009 and the offence of rape was also added. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and in any case it is a case of consent. Besides it is submitted that as per the report of the Radiologist, the age of the prosecutrix is between 17 to 19 years. Moreover, as per the statement of the prosecutrix, she has accepted Crl. Misc. No.M-4785 of 2010 -2- her relationship with the petitioner. In response, learned State counsel has submitted that the petitioner is clearly responsible for abduction as alleged by the complainant against the petitioner. Besides, it is on the statement of the prosecutrix that the offence under Section 376 IPC has been added. After giving my thoughtful consideration to the matter, it may be noticed that the petitioner is in custody since 06.06.2009. Amarjeet Kaur is a co-accused of the petitioner. Against her proceedings for declaring her a Proclaimed Offender have been initiated. The case is fixed for appearance of the accused on 19.05.2010. The prosecutrix in her statement indeed accepts her relationship with the petitioner and has also stated that she had left her house of her free will and started living in the house of Tehal Singh in the same village. Amarjeet Kaur, mother of the petitioner and Baljeet Kaur, maternal aunt of the petitioner had advised them to run away from the house and return back after 1-2 months. According to the prosecutrix, the petitioner had committed rape with her on the pretext of marriage. The question whether the case is one of consent or not, is not to be considered at this stage and it is to be gone into after evidence has been lead. Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 06.06.2009 and the trial in the case has not commenced even and is likely to take time, it would be just and expedient that the petitioner is released on bail on his furnishing personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mohali. Accordingly the petitioner on his furnishing personal bond Crl. Misc. No.M-4785 of 2010 -2- and surety to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mohali shall be admitted to bail. May 12, 2010 (S.S.SARON) sonia JUDGE