Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Cr.M.P.(M) No.1002 of 2008. Dated of Decision: October 23, 2008. Piare Lal. …..… Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. ……. Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? No. For the Petitioner: Mr. G.S. Sisodia, Advocate, vice Ms. Bindiya Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. J.S. Guleria, Law Officer. Surinder Singh, J (oral): The present petition has been filed for seeking bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in FIR No.60/2008 registered on 22.7.2008, under Sections 363, 366 and 376 (g) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, in Police Station Rohru, for allegedly committing the rape on the prosecutrix, aged about 15 years. Precisely, the case of the prosecution is that on 21.7.2008 the prosecutrix was given lift by the petitioner and his co-accused Lal Hussain alias Lachhu in a Taxi. On the way, she was not allowed to deboard and was taken ahead. Thereafter she was denuded and Piare Lal committed the rape and co-accused stood guard. It is alleged that the prosecutrix was weeping throughout and the passersby got suspicious. On seeing them, Lachhu fled away from the spot and the petitioner remained inside the vehicle for sometime along with the prosecutrix, but finding an opportunity, he also got escaped. The passersby named Srv.Shri Khushal Sharma and 2 Vinod Redka asked about the identity of the girl and her address and informed her parents. Thereafter the aforesaid FIR was lodged. The prosecutrix was medically examined, her clothes were taken into possession and sent for forensic examination. The semen was found on the salwar of the prosecutrix and blood traces were found on the seat cover of the Taxi of the petitioner. In her statement, the petitioner clearly implicated the petitioner and his co- accused, who was allegedly the facilitator of the crime. Both were arrested and medically examined. Presently, they are lodged in the judicial lock-up. As per the birth certificate, obtained by the police, date of birth of the prosecutrix is 15th May, 1993, which synchronizes with that of the radiological examination. It prima-facie shows that the prosecutrix is less than 16 years of age, therefore, the question of consent does not arise in this case. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and the manner in which the offence was committed by the petitioner, the liberty of bail cannot be granted to the petitioner, as such, the application is dismissed. The petitioner, as per his counsel, is said to be the patient of tuberculosis. The respondent-State is directed to provide an appropriate medical treatment to him. Application stands disposed of. October 23, 2008. (Surinder Singh) (Pds) Judge.