Crl. Misc. No.M-17149 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No.M-17149 of 2011. Date of decision: December 13, 2011. Major Singh .. Petitioner VERSUS State of Punjab. .. Respondent * * * CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI * * * PRESENT Mr.Gursimran Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.K.S.Sidhu, DAG., Punjab. Ms.G.K.Mann, Advocate, for the complainant. M.M.S.BEDI, J (ORAL). Since the prosecutrix appearing in the Court has specifically named and identified the petitioner, it will not be prudent to grant the concession of bail to him. Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon judgment of Hon'ble the Apex Court in Criminal Appeal No.2178 of 2011, titled Sanjay Chandra Vs. CBI , decided on 23.11.2011, laying down the following parameters for the grant of regular bail:- “In para 25 of the judgment, Hon'ble the Apex Court has observed that “it is, no doubt, true that the nature of the charge may be relevant, but at the same time, the punishment to which the party may ..1 . Crl. Misc. No.M-17149 of 2011 be liable, if convicted, also bears upon the issue. It has been observed that in determining whether to grant bail, both, the seriousness of the charge and the severity of the punishment should be taken into consideration. The grant or refusal to grant bail lies within the discretion of the Court. The grant or denial is regulated, to a large extent, by the facts and circumstances of each particular case. In view of the said observations ultimately, it has been held that at the same time right to bail is not to be denied merely because of the sentiments of the community against the accused.” I have considered the principles observed in the said judgment. In the present case there is a statutory presumption under Section 114-A of the Evidence Act, against the petitioner as the prosecutrix while appearing in the Court has levelled allegations of gang rape against the petitioner and others. Counsel for the petitioner has not been able to prima facie rebut the said statutory presumption warranting the grant of concession of regular bail. Taking into consideration, the nature of the charge, statutory presumption and the severity of the punishment, I do not find any ground to grant the concession of bail to the petitioner. The petition is dismissed. However, the trial Court is directed to dispose of the trial within a period of six months after the receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that in case the ..2 . Crl. Misc. No.M-17149 of 2011 prosecutrix evades appearance after the order passed under Section 319 Cr.P.C. (which has been allowed), it will be open to the petitioner to approach this Court again for the grant of regular bail after the period of six months. (M.M.S.BEDI) JUDGE December 13, 2011. rka ..3 .