Tona @ Pawan vs State of Haryana

Rajan Gupta, J.—This is a petition u/s 439 Cr.P.C. seeking regular bail in a case registered against the petitioner under Sections 363, 366 & 376 IPC vide FIR No.622 dated 29.11.2009 at Police Station Model Town, Panipat.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that prosecutrix married the petitioner according to her own wish. According to Learned Counsel, marriage took place on 9.3.2009 in accordance with Hindu marriage rites. The FIR was later on registered at the instance of father of the prosecutrix. He further submits that in a statement recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. the prosecutrix admitted the factum of marriage.

Learned Counsel has, thus, referred to exception to Section 376 IPC to contend that offence u/s 376 IPC is not made out. Learned State counsel has, however, opposed the prayer for bail on the ground that allegations against the petitioner are serious and prosecution witnesses are yet to be examined. However, learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Lal Singh, who is present in court, does not dispute the fact that in her statement recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. the prosecutrix admitted the factum of marriage.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case particularly that petitioner has been in custody since 7.12.2009 and trial has been stayed in another petition (Criminal Misc. No. 11302-M of 2010), no useful purpose will be served by detaining the petitioner in custody any longer. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on bail to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Panipat.