IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MP(M) No. 1116 of 2009. Date of decision: January 6, 2010. Sakto Ram …..Petitioner. Vs. State of H.P. …. Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. M.S.Guleria, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. A.K. Bansal, Addl. A.G. with Mr. R.P.Singh, Asstt. A.G. Kuldip Singh, Judge (Oral). This is an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for releasing the petitioner on bail in F.I.R. No. 259 dated 30.10.2009 registered at Police Station, Sadar Chamba, under Sections 452, 376, 506-II, IPC. The status report has been filed. 2. Heard and perused the record. It has been stated on behalf of the petitioner that prosecutrix on 30.10.2009 has lodged a false complaint against the petitioner. It has been submitted that investigation in the case is complete and no recovery is to be made from the petitioner. The petitioner is ready to furnish the bail bonds in accordance with the directions of this court. The petitioner earlier had filed bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C., which was rejected by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Chamba.. The petitioner filed another bail application after his arrest, which was Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? …2… also rejected by the learned Sessions Jude, Chamba on 23.11.2009. It has been stated that prosecutrix was major at the time of commissioning of alleged offence. On these grounds, the learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner. 3. The bail application has been opposed by the learned Addl. Advocate General. He has submitted that prosecutrix on 30.10.2009 reported the matter at Police Station. On the basis of complaint of the prosecutrix the case was registered. The prosecutrix was got medically examined and the MLC was issued on 31.10.2009. The prosecutrix at the time of medical examination was found pregnant. The petitioner was arrested on 8.11.2009. The petitioner during investigation gave an affidavit and stated that he had developed relations with the prosecutrix and due to that relationship the prosecutrix has conceived. It has been submitted that two bail applications of the petitioner were earlier rejected. The challan has been submitted in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chamba. In the MLC the doctor found prosecutrix with pregnancy of 19 weeks 4 days. The learned Addl. Advocate General has prayed for dismissal of the bail application. 4. I have considered the rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties. The date of birth of prosecutrix as per police file is 8.3.1990. The prosecutrix in the FIR has stated that petitioner entered in her house, finding her alone committed forcible sexual intercourse with her. Thereafter he put the knife on her throat and threatened to kill her as he was apprehending that prosecutrix would disclose the incident to others. The prosecutrix got frightened and …3… requested the petitioner that she would not disclose the incident to anyone and prayed for her life. The petitioner while leaving the prosecutrix again threatened that he would kill her in case the prosecutrix would disclose the incident to anyone. The prosecutrix has stated that for this reason she did not disclose the incident to anyone. The prosecutrix has also stated that she is pregnant. The mother of the prosecutrix suspected pregnancy of the prosecutrix and when she questioned her then prosecutrix disclosed the incident to her mother. Thereafter prosecutrix and her father went to the police station and prosecutrix lodged the report. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as per prosecution case the consent of the prosecutrix for the alleged act is clear. The prosecutrix on the date of incident was 19 years, therefore, the petitioner is entitled to bail. The two bail applications of the petitioner have already been rejected. The prosecutrix has alleged that petitioner had committed forcible sexual intercourse with her and he even threatened to kill her in case she would disclose the incident to anyone. Simply because the prosecutrix on the date of incident was 19 years is not enough at this stage to come to conclusion that sexual intercourse was committed by the petitioner with the prosecutrix with her consent. The challan has been submitted in the court and the trial court will consider the aspect of consent. The petitioner has failed to make out any case for grant of bail. Accordingly, the bail application is dismissed. January 6, 2010. ( Kuldip Singh ), (Hem) Judge. …4… 6. 7. ed. 8. The observations made in the order are for the disposal of the bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the case.