Irshad Ahmed vs State of Punjab

Mehinder Singh Sullar, J.—Having lost his right of bail in the Court of Session, the petitioner Irshad Ahmed son of Kitab Ali has directed the present petition for regular bail in a case registered against him, vide FIR No. 222 dated 19.10.2009 (Annexure P1), on accusation of having committed the offence punishable under Sections 376 and 506 IPC by the police of Police Station Haibowal, District Ludhiana, invoking the provisions of Section 439 Cr.PC.

Notice of the petition was issued to the State.

Concisely, the prosecution claimed that the prosecutrix was residing with the petitioner and his wife Razia at Ludhiana. Irshad Ahmed, the husband of Razia used to sleep on the bed of the prosecutrix at night and to commit rape with her for the last 5/6 months. She did not disclose this fact to any body due to fear. On 17.10.2009 at about 8/9 A.M., she came out from the house of the petitioner for bringing milk and did not return. On 19.10.2009, her statement was recorded, which forms the basis of FIR. According to the prosecution, the petitioner was residing with his wife Razia and has been committing rape with the prosecutrix for the last about 5/6 months. On the basis of aforesaid allegations, the criminal case was registered against the petitioner as indicated here-in-above.

Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties, having gone through the record with their valuable help and in view of inherent contradictions in the statement of main prosecution witness (prosecutrix), to my mind, the petitioner is entitled to bail in the obtaining circumstances of the case.

It is not a matter of dispute that the petitioner was arrested on 19.10.2009 and since then he is in custody/jail. The statement (Annexure P2) of the prosecutrix (PW3) has already been recorded by the trial Court, in which, she has, inter-alia, stated that she was residing with Razia and Mr. Warsi has committed rape with her. She did not support the prosecution and was declared hostile. In cross-examination, she has admitted that she was 20 years of age and was residing in the house of the petitioner alongwith his wife Razia. She has also admitted that there is only one house of the accused, who is Muslim by religion. The inhabitants of the street are inimical towards the accused and his family. Due to that reason, the mother of Vicky did not agree for her marriage with Vicky. The mother of Vicky has got registered the FIR against the accused by using her (PW3). She denied that the accused has committed rape upon her.

In the light of the aforesaid reasons and without commenting anything on merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side during the course of the trial of the case, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate/or in his absence, Duty Magistrate, Ludhiana.

However, it is made clear that nothing recorded herein above would reflect on the merits of the case, in any manner, as the same has been so observed for a limited purpose of deciding the instant petition.

The present petition is disposed of accordingly.