IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-31672 of 2011 Date of decision : December 20, 2011 Vinod ....Petitioner versus State of Haryana ....Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice L.N. Mittal Present : Mr. PK Rohilla, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. C.S. Bakshi, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana L.N. Mittal, J. (Oral) Accused Vinod has filed this petition for bail in case FIR No. 95 dated 7.3.2011, under sections 323, 342, 354, 376, 511 IPC, registered at Police Station Sadar, Panipat. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file. According to the prosecution version, the petitioner took the prosecutrix aged nine years only to his house and attempted to commit rape on her and when she resisted and tried to raise alarm, she was caused injuries. Statement of prosecutrix under section 164 Cr.P.C. has also been recorded. Counsel for the petitioner contended that petitioner is in custody since 9.3.2011 i.e. for more than nine months and he has been Criminal Misc. No. M-31672 of 2011 -2- falsely implicated on account of party faction. I have carefully considered the aforesaid contentions but the same cannot be accepted at this stage. The petitioner tried to ravish a girl aged nine years only. On her resistance, the petitioner even caused injuries to her. FIR was lodged promptly. Even statement of prosecutrix under section 164 Cr.P.C. has been recorded corroborating the prosecution version. The complainant would not have put at stake future career and life of his nine years daughter to simply implicate the petitioner in a false case of this nature on account of alleged party faction. Keeping in view all the circumstances but without meaning to express any opinion on merits, the petitioner in my opinion, does not deserve the concession of bail. Dismissed. ( L.N. Mittal ) December 20, 2011 Judge 'dalbir'