Narinder Singh vs U.T.

Sabina, J.—This petition has been filed by Narinder Singh u/s 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of regular bail in case FIR No. 215 dated 28.5.2007, under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Sector 34, Chandigarh.

Prosecution story, in brief, as per the FIR, as reproduced in para 1 of the petition is as under:

Statement of Miss Manjit Kaur d/o Darshan Singh resident of village Jhankian P.S.Gardhala Police Station Sadar Ropar Tehsil Anandpur Sahib District Ropar aged 24 years. Stated that I am resident of above mentioned address and MBA pass. I belong to a normal family. My friend Ravinder Kaur is residing in America and she usually talks to me once or twice in month on telephone. I told her that I wanted to do some job. My friend Ravinder Kaur told me that her uncle Narinder Singh is running a Cycle Factory and he is having good relationship with many high officials. She asked me to go and meet him and he will get me job somewhere and his mobile phone number is 98140 30618. About 15 days back I had a talk on this telephone with him telling him that Ravinder Kaur had given me his number. I told him that I am in need of a job. I told him to get met some good job, if he can do so. I told him that my name was Manjit and I was badly in need of job. About 12/13 days ago he called me to Ludhiana and told me to take letter of job but there he did not give me any letter. Narinder Singh noted my address and told me that he will send the letter. I gave him address of House No. 3275 Sector 23-

D, Chandigarh as my friend is staying there. He sent a letter there and it was not bearing any address. I told him that there is no address on the letter. Narinder Singh told me that he will himself come to Chandigarh and get me a job. I came to house of my friend in Sector 23 on 27.5.2007. Narinder Singh phone me on 27.5.2007 at 8 p.m. that he will be coming to Chandigarh tomorrow and asked me to meet him at about 9.10 a.m. near Sector 23, Chandigarh. I told him that I will meet him there. Today in the morning, I was present at my house. Narinder Singh called on my mobile and asked me as to when I was. Narinder Singh asked me to come to Gurudwara Sector 23. I came there. Narinder Singh took me in his car to House No. 1329/1, Sector 34, Chandigarh. He asked me to wait there and told that he has office on the first floor of the house. He told me that he will bring my appointment. He went up stairs and from there he signaled me to come upstairs. I went to first floor. Narinder Singh made me sit in the room and make me drink juice. He locked the door of the room. I asked him '' uncle as to what he was doing" Narinder Singh pressed me mouth and threw me on the bed and raped me forcibly. After committing rape, he threatened to kill me if I told about it to any body. I ran and come out of the room and immediately phoned my friend Rupinder Kaur daughter of Mewa Singh residing in House No. 3275, Sector 23, Chandigarh. She came to Sector 34 and I told her to about it. She has brought me to Police Station and I have made my statement. Narinder Singh son of Gurbachan Singh resident of 1329/1, Sector 34, Chandigarh has committed rape with me on the pretext of getting job to me and has also threatened to kill me. Legal action may be taken against Narinder Singh. I have made my statement which is correct.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that in the present case, the petitioner has been falsely involved in this case. Prosecution has now concluded its evidence and hence, there is no question of any threat to the witnesses. As per the report submitted by the Senior Superintendent of Police Fatehgarh Sahib dated 23.11.2007 (Annexure P-1), it transpired that the prosecutrix had sexually intercourse with the petitioner as she was in love with him but later on got him falsely involved in this case. The conspiracy had been hatched either to malign image of the petitioner or to extract money from him.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that in order to lead cogent defence evidence, it is necessary in the interest of justice to release the petitioner on bail. The petitioner had been thrice released on interim bail but he had never misused the concession of bail.

Learned Standing counsel for U.T. Chandigarh as well as learned Counsel for the complainant, on the other hand, have opposed this petition. Learned Counsel for the complainant has submitted that the petitioner only wanted to create evidence.

In the present case, the prosecution evidence has since been concluded. Now the case is listed for defence evidence. The allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. The petitioner cannot be allowed bail in order to enable him to lead his defence evidence. The petitioner can summon witnesses to prove the relevant record of telephone calls, sought to be proved by him in his defence.

Keeping in view the seriousness of offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioner, no ground for grant of bail is made out.

Accordingly, this petition is dismissed.