Sushma Devi 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. 65, dated 13.5.2013, under Sections 363, 366A, 376, 452, 506, 149 IPC, registered at Police Station Nangal, District Rupnagar, Punjab. 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, Ropar, vide which application filed on behalf of the present petitioner for anticipatory bail was dismissed.

Briefly stated, the case of prosecution is that daughter of complainant stated to be 14 years of age, who was coming from her aunt''s house when petitioner and co-accused met her. Petitioner was already known to the daughter of the complainant being their neighbour. They told her that she would be dropped at her residence and hence, she agreed to take lift on the motor-cycle on which petitioner was also sitting. However, they had taken her to some other place and she was made unconscious. When she gained consciousness she found herself at the house of maternal parents of co-accused Mangal Singh. Rape was committed upon her there. The factum of rape was also confirmed as per medical evidence.

It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner-accused that it has been falsely stated by complainant that prosecutrix was 14 years of age and rather she was 19 years of age as she had filed a petition u/s 125 Cr.P.C. against her husband for grant of maintenance allowance in which she stated her age as 19 years. It is also contended that she has been falsely implicated in this case at the instance of another lady from whom she was to take some money.

So far as age of prosecutrix is concerned, it is a matter of evidence. However, at this stage, there are specific allegations against petitioner-accused that she alongwith co-accused enticed the prosecutrix to go with her on the plea that she would be dropped at her residence being neighbour and however, she was taken to unknown place, made unconscious and rape was committed upon her by co-accused.

Hence, 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-Sushma Devi for grant of anticipatory bail is, hereby, dismissed being devoid of any merit.