Preeto Bai vs State of Punjab

Ram Chand Gupta, J.—The present petition filed u/s 438 Cr.P.C. is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 127, dated 22.7.2013, under Sections 363, 366A, 120B IPC (later on added Section 376 IPC), registered at Police Station Sadar Jalalabad, District Fazilka. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the whole record carefully, including the impugned order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fazilka, vide which application filed on behalf of the present petitioner for anticipatory bail was dismissed.

Brief allegations are that petitioner is mother of main accused. Prosecutrix whose date of birth as per birth certificate issued by the Registrar, Birth and Death, Fazilka, is 4.5.1996 and hence, she was minor on the date of alleged occurrence. Petitioner wanted to get her son married with the prosecutrix and for that purpose she also visited the house of the complainant and tried to persuade her to marry her son despite objections being raised by the complainant that their daughter was minor and they were not ready to perform the marriage of their daughter with the son of present petitioner. Prosecutrix was taken away by son of present petitioner and co-accused forcibly from the fields and thereafter rape was committed upon her by son of petitioner. She also suffered statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C. before Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jalalabad, on 16.9.2013, in which she stated that she was forcibly taken away by the son of the petitioner and kept her at some place where petitioner also visited and supplied clothes and hence, petitioner was in the knowledge of fact of kidnapping of minor daughter of the complainant by her son. She has specifically stated that she was forced to sign on some papers and forced to appear in the Court as threat was raised to her by petitioner and the co-accused.

It has been vehemently contended by learned counsel for the petitioner-accused that as per school certificate of the prosecutrix, her date of birth was mentioned as 3.3.1995. It is further contended that prosecutrix had gone with the petitioner with her free will and performed marriage and they had also appeared before this Court for protection. It is also vehemently contended that as per allegations, petitioner-accused provided only clothes to her son and prosecutrix while they were staying voluntarily at some place. He has also placed reliance upon Chander Pal Singh Vs. State of Punjab,

There are serious allegations against petitioner-accused. She in connivance with her son enticed away the minor girl of the complainant. Her marriage was performed forcibly and rape was committed upon her. As she was minor at the time of kidnapping and alleged marriage hence her alleged consent is of no help to the accused.

In view of these facts, it is not such a case in which extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner-accused. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition filed by petitioner-Preeto Bai for grant of anticipatory bail is, hereby, dismissed being devoid of any merit.