Criminal Misc.-M No. 27524 of 2011 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc.-M No. 27524 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: 16.9.2011 Munish Sharma .. Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab .. Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. P. S. Sullar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. P. S. Bajwa, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. ... Rajesh Bindal J. Prayer in the present petition is for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the complaint filed by Rekha Rani to Senior Superintendent of Police, Gurdaspur on 27.10.2010, it is claimed that she is legally wedded wife of Deepak Sharma. The grouse was that the parents of her husband had taken him away. Name of the petitioner was not mentioned. The FIR was registered subsequent thereto on 22.6.2011 with similar allegations. In the initial enquiry conducted, the petitioner was no where in picture. However, subsequently in an enquiry conducted by Deputy Superintendent of Police, the complainant improved her version and even named the petitioner stating that he had committed rape with her under threat. The submission is that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. The incident is stated to be quite old, but still the FIR came to be registered in the year 2011. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submitted that subsequent to the initial complaint, the complainant got her statement recorded stating that in the absence of her husband, the petitioner used to come to her home and commit rape with her under threat. It continued for Criminal Misc.-M No. 27524 of 2011 [2] quite some time. Initially, the complainant did not inform anyone, as she had been threatened. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that the petitioner had not been named in the initial version, as is evident from the complaint filed by the complainant on 27.10.2010 to Senior Superintendent of Police, Gurdaspur, where she claimed that she was legally wedded wife of Deepak Sharma and further not even in the FIR registered subsequent thereto on 22.6.2011, in my opinion, the petitioner is not required to be taken into custody for interrogation. The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on 27.9.2011 at 10.00 AM for joining investigation. In case of arrest, the petitioner shall be released on furnishing of bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investigating Officer. He shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called upon for further investigation. He shall also be bound by all the conditions as contained in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. The petition stands disposed of. (Rajesh Bindal) Judge 16.9.2011 mk