IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MPM No.585 of 2009 Decided on : July 23, 2009 Nitish Kumar …Applicant. Versus State of H.P. …Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Applicant : Mr. Bimal Gupta, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. Ramesh Thakur, Assistant Advocate General. Surjit Singh, J (Oral) Heard and gone through the record. 2. Applicant is in custody, in a case, under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, which has been registered on 19th June, 2009, against the present applicant and several other persons, on the basis of report lodged by Sudesh Kumari, mother of the prosecutrix. 3. After the lodging of the report, on 19th June, 2009, prosecutrix was recovered from the house of the applicant. Her statement was recorded on 20th June, 2009. In the said statement, prosecutrix got recorded that on 3rd June, 2009, around 7.30 or 7.45 a.m., when Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? …2… she was deputed by her mother to Bazaar at Jahu to fetch milk, she boarded a bus and went to the house of the applicant in Hamirpur Town, where she and her mother had been earlier living, in the neighbourhood of the applicant. She stated that on the next following day, her mother came to get her back to her house, but a sister of the applicant and one Lachhi, living in the neighbourhood of the applicant, prompted her not to go with her mother and on 6th June, 2009, she was coerced to address an application to the Superintendent of Police, Hamirpur, making serious allegations therein against her mother. She also stated that on 6th June, 2009, she was raped by the present applicant in a room of his house at Hamirpur. 4. From the record of investigation, it appears that earlier the prosecutrix and her mother, who is a widow, lived at Hamirpur, in the neighbourhood of the applicant. About three months prior to the incident, the mother of the prosecutrix shifted to Jahu, a place at a distance of about 30 kms from Hamirpur. She took the prosecutrix with her. Prosecutrix left her mother’s place on 3rd June, 2009 of her own and went to the house of the applicant, where latter’s parents and sister also reside. 5. On 5th June, 2009, an application was presented to the Superintendent of Police, Hamirpur. Application was signed by the prosecutrix. In that …3… application, it was alleged that prosecutrix’ mother had been giving beatings to her, because she had seen her in an objectionable situation, with a Head Constable of Police named Surjit Singh. Superintendent of Police called the mother of the prosecutrix on 5th June, 2009, itself. After that the prosecutrix did not go with her mother, but went with the present applicant and stayed with him upto 20th June, 2009, when police took her away from the house of the applicant, after the registration of the case on 19th June, 2009. Age of the prosecutrix, at the relevant time, was more than 16 years. 6. From the facts and the circumstances of the case, I am convinced that this is a fit case for grant of bail. Hence, the application is allowed. Applicant is ordered to be released, on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.10,000/-, with one surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hamirpur. Copy dasti. July 23, 2009(sd) ( Surjit Singh ), J