Sandeep @ Prince vs State of Haryana

Nidhi Gupta, J

Prayer in this petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner during pendency of the trial in case FIR No.331 dated 21.6.2023 (Annnexure P-1) under Sections 342, 376((2)(n), 376-D, 506, 34 IPC, registered at Police Station Civil Lines, District Hisar.

The present FIR has been registered on the basis of statement of the complainant, who is marrried lady of 32 years of age, which reaads as follows :-

“…..I, xxxx wife of Sh. Rajender Sharma is resident of village Ramgarh, Ward No.1, 7 Barni District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan, at present residing as tenant at Patel Nagar, Hisar. About 02 month, there was somee altercation between me and my husband and thereafter, being annoying from my husband, on 10.04.2023, at about 10:30 AM, I came at Hisar Bus Stand. I met an unknown lady there who told me thatt my name is Payal, to whom I told that I scuffled with my husband and came there. I have no place to live and then Payal asked that I will provide you sweeper work, and who further told me that I am having Shri Kripa Hotel also and you can workk there as sweeper and cook. Thereafter, Payaltook me to her house Girl High School Patel Nagar Hisar. Thereafter, I stayed there nicely for few days, and thereafter Sandeep alias Prince son of Madal Lal husband of Payal forcibly developed physical relations with me and asked that if you discclosed to anyone then I will kill you. Thereafter, Deepak who was friend of Prince started coming at the house and he also started developing physical relations with me forcibly by saying thaat if you disclosed to anyone then we will kill youu. When I disclosed this to Payal, then Payal asked that such type of act usually going on in ouur Hotel and Payal also gave beatings to me. Therreafter, all of three started taking me at Shri Krripa Hotel where the Hotel Manager Deepak and Sandeep alias Prince developed physical relations with me and they compelled me to develop physical relations with other persons, if denied, then they used to give beatings and used to lock me in the hotel. Strict legal action should be taken against all three. I shall be thankful to you. Thanking You….”

Mr. Dikshit Arora, Advocatte has put in appearance on behalf of petitioner and placed on record his Vakalatnama, endorsing ‘No Objection’ from the previous counsell, which is taken on record.

Learned counsel for the peetitioner, inter alia, submits that as per the FIR, the first incident iss stated to be of 10.4.2023, whereas FIR has been registered after a delay of two months on 21.6.20233. Learned counsel for the petitioner further points out that the complainant/victim has submitted ann affidavit dated 16.12.2023 (Annexurre P-2) wherein she has admitted that the present FIR came to be registeered due to misunderstanding between her and the accused persons inn the FIR. It is submitted that there are three accused in the present caase, out of whom accused Deeppak has been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 25.6.2024 passed in CRM-M-34861-2024. There is no medical evidence to incriminate the petitioner. Challan in the present casee was filed on 20.10.2023; charges were framed on 11.3.2024; and out of total 17 prosecution witnesses only one official formal witnesss has been examined so far. The petitiioner has been in custody as unndertrial for almost one year. It is accorrdingly prayed that the petitionerr be released on regular bail.

Learned counsel for the Staate counters the submissions made on behalf of petitioner and submits that the arrest of co-accused Payal is still pending. Learned counsel for the State submits that she has no instructions with regard to the allleged affidavit (Annexure P-2). FSL in the present case is negative. Learned counsel for the State, on instruuctions, informs that one objectionable video of the complainant was recovered from the moobile phone of the petitioner, which is at present in FSL and reportt in that regard is awaited. Learned counsel for the State further infforms that the petitioner has been in cuustody since 25.7.2023; and therre are two other FIRs against the petitioner i.e. 1) FIR No.561 datedd 11.11.2022 under Section 3(a),4 andd 5 of Immoral Traffick (Preventtion) Act, registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Hisar; and 2) FIR No.161 dated 21.6.2023 under Sections 294, 427, 500, 506, 509, 34 IPCC, registered at Police Station Civil Linees, Hisar. Learned counsel for the State vehemently submits that the victim in the present case has not yet been examined and there is apprehension that in case the petitioneer is granted regular bail, he will try to influence the prosecution witneesses.

I have heard learned counssel for the parties and gone through thhe case file carefully.

Without commenting on the merits of the case, however, keeping in view the totality of facts and circumstances of the case as noted aboove, especially in view of the fact that complainant/victim is yet to be examined in the present matter, the petition for grant of regular baail to the petitioner is hereby dismissed.