Cr.M.P.(M) No. 1311 of 2008 18.12.2008 Present: Mr. O.P. Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R.K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. Rajinder Dogra, Additional Advocate General for the respondent. This is an application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the grant of bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 143 of 2008 dated 30.8.2008 registered at Police Station, Baddi, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh for offences punishable under sections 376, 342 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. Mr. O.P. Chauhan, Advocate has strenuously argued that his client is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case. He further submitted that the prosecutrix is 30 years of age and his client is a reputed person having four children. The eldest daughter of the petitioner is 20 years and younger daughters are 10 and 8 years, respectively. He is also having a son of 8 months. These children are living with mother in the village. The learned Senior Additional Advocate General has opposed the bail application. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner had earlier approached the learned Sessions Judge, Solan seeking bail. The application was rejected by the learned Sessions Judge, Solan on 21.11.2008. The case of the prosecution culled out from the order dated 21.11.2008 is that the petitioner was working as Security Guard in the Guest House. He took the prosecutrix to the Guest House on 30,8,2008 on the pretext that one Sh. J.P. Singh has called her for cleaning the Guest House and he will get her appointed on permanent basis. She was left at the Guest House by her husband. She went from the Guest House after half an hour and told that she has been raped by the petitioner. The prosecutrix is from the State of Orissa. Mr. O.P. Chauhan has strenuously argued that the entire family of the petitioner is dependent upon his earning. Committing rape is a heinous crime. No leniency can be shown to the persons, who are involved in heinous crime, like rape only on the ground that their families would be put to difficulties. Mr. O.P. Chauhan has also failed to pin point any subsequent development which might have taken place between 21.11.2008 till date. Accordingly the petitioner has not made out any case for his release on bail In view of the observations made hereinabove, there is no force in the application and the same is dismissed. The observations made in this order are for the disposal of this application and the same shall not be treated as an expression/opinion on the merits of the case. (Rajiv Sharma), J. December 18, 2008. *awasthi