Sumit Singh vs State of Himachal Pradesh

Kuldip Singh, Judge

This is an application u/s 439 Cr.P.C. for releasing the petitioner on bail in FIR No. 303 of 2011 dated 19.12.2011 registered at Police Station, Baddi, District Solan, under Sections 376G, 342 and 506 IPC. It has been stated that the case has been registered against the petitioner for offences punishable under Sections 376G, 342, 506 IPC. The prosecution story is that petitioner alongwith four other accused is involved in the rape case. The prosecution story is false and fabricated. The petitioner is in Jail for the last three months. The petitioner had filed bail application before the learned Sessions Judge, Solan, which was withdrawn on 23.3.2012. The other three Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? yes accused Ashish Kumar, Manoj Kumar and Narender Singh have been granted bail by the High Court on 20.1.2012 and 5.4.2012.

It has been stated that the petitioner is innocent. He has committed no offence. The petitioner is ready to furnish bail bonds. It has been stated that investigation in the case is complete. The submission has been made for releasing the petitioner on bail.

The status report has been filed. It has been stated that the case has been registered on 19.12.2011 on the statement u/s 154 Cr.P.C. of the prosecutrix. The prosecutrix has stated that she had been working in a factory at Haraipur (Baddi)for the last 6-7 months. On 18.12.2011 she had come to Kishanpura for purchasing ration items. At about 6.30 p.m. near Kishanpura school, two boys Parveen Kumar and Sumeet Kumar met her, who were known to her. The boys were on motorcycle.

Sumeet asked the prosecutrix to accompany him as his sister-in-law was not feeling well. The prosecutrix believed Sumeet and sat with them on the motorcycle. They took her in Phase-2, house No. 298 where three boys were already in the room. On her entering the room, Parveen Kumar bolted the door. In the big room, three beds were laid on the floor. The light was switched off and she was forced to lie on the bed and Parveen committed forcible sexual intercourse with her. It has been alleged that when prosecutrix cried for help then Sumeet raised the volume of T.V. and put his hand on the mouth of the prosecutrix and shut her mouth and threatened to kill her. Narinder Kumar who was present in the room with the intention to commit rape with her also teased the prosecutrix.

Ashish and Manoj Kumar were in the room and they watched everything when Parveen committed forcible sexual intercourse with her. The prosecutrix was confined in the room till 4.00 O''Clock in the morning, thereafter Parveen dropped the prosecutrix at Kishanpura on motorcycle and threatened her not to disclose the incident to anyone otherwise he would kill her. The prosecutrix narrated the incident to her friend Nirmala and Sanju, who informed the police. On this case has been registered. It has been stated that there are in all five accused namely Parveen Kumar, Sumeet Kumar, Ashish Kumar, Manoj Kumar and Narinder Singh. On completion of investigation, challan has been submitted in the court under Sections 376G, 342, 506 IPC. The submission has been made for rejection of the bail application.

Heard and perused the record. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that Ashish Kumar, Manoj Kumar and Narinder Singh have already been released on bail. It has been submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are similar to the allegations against Ashish Kumar, Manoj Kumar and Narinder Singh, therefore, bail has been prayed on the principle of parity. The learned Additional Advocate General has submitted that the case is fixed for consideration of charge on 21.4.2012. The learned Additional Advocate General has submitted that the allegations against the petitioner and Ashish Kumar, Manoj Kumar and Narinder Singh are distinct. The allegation against the petitioner is that he raised the volume of the TV and put his hand on the mouth of the prosecutrix when she tried to raise cries when she was raped by Parveen Kumar. He also threatened the prosecutrix to kill.

The allegations against the petitioner are of gang rape u/s 376(2) (g). The Explanation 1 of sub section (2) of Section 376 provides that where a woman is raped by one or more in a group of persons acting in furtherance of their common intention, each of the persons shall be deemed to have committed gang rape within the meaning of sub section (2) of Section 376. According to prosecutrix, the petitioner took the prosecutrix on bike with Parveen Kumar in a room where other accused were present and Parveen Kumar committed forcible sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix and during that process petitioner raised the volume of TV and put his hand on the mouth of the prosecutrix to prevent her from raising cries. He also threatened to kill her. Thus, the allegations against the petitioner cannot be said to be same as against Ashish Kumar, Manoj Kumar and Narinder Singh. The allegations against petitioner are serious. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the petition is dismissed. The observations made in this judgment are for disposal of bail petition only and the same shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.