SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Jitender @ Bholu vs State Of Haryana on 12 October, 2018

CRM-M-25361-2018 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

CRM-M-25361-2018
Date of decision:- 12.10.2018

Jitender @ Bholu
…Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

…Respondent

CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE H.S. MADAAN

Present: Mr.S.S. Kharb, Advocate
for the petitioner.

Mr.Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana.

****

H.S. MADAAN, J. (Oral)

This petition has been filed for the grant of regular bail to the

petitioner – Jitender @ Bholu, an accused in FIR No.148 dated 9.3.2018,

under Sections 354 IPC and 12 of POCSO Act, 2012, registered at Police

Station Samalkha, District Panipat.

Briefly stated, the facts of the case as per the prosecution

story are that the FIR in question was lodged by complainant Dharambir

son of Kundan, resident of village Atta, Tehsil Samalkha, District Panipat,

who in the written complaint submitted by him to Incharge, Police Post

Samalkha submitted that his daughter (name withheld to protect her

identity in view of Section 228-A IPC and as per the directions given by

1 of 4
14-10-2018 03:39:41 :::
CRM-M-25361-2018 -2-

the Hon’ble Apex Court Court in case titled State of Karnataka Vs.

Puttaraja, 2004(1) RCR(Cri.) Supreme Court, 113 (SC) and referred to as

the prosecutrix) aged about 17 years had gone to Government School,

Bhapra for 12th class examination on 9.3.2018; that accused Jitender @

Bholu son of Ramesh, resident of village Mahra, District Sonipat, who is

devar (brother-in-law) of elder daughter of the complainant entered into

the class room, where the prosecutrix was sitting for examination and

misbehaved with her giving her beatings trying to kidnap her; that the

prosecutrix was rescued by students and staff present there; that Jitender

@ Bholu had come in a Ecco vehicle accompanied by 4-5 persons having

weapons. He sought taking of action against them.

On the basis of such complaint, formal FIR was registered.

The investigation in the case started. The statement of the prosecutrix was

recorded by the police. Thereafter, her statement under Section 164

Cr.P.C. was also got recorded from SDJM, Samalkha. Accused was

arrested in this case on 10.3.2018. He by making disclosure statement got

recovered ECCO vehicle, which was taken into possession. Subsequently,

the complainant and the prosecutrix got recorded supplementary statement

stating that only Jitender @ Bholu was present there and 4-5 persons

were not there and they were not having arms. On completion of

investigation, challan was prepared and filed in the Court adding offence

under Section 10 of the POCSO Act, whereas Section 12 thereof was

deleted.

After presentation of the challan, charge against the accused

has been framed and the trial is going on. The petitioner/accused had

moved an application for regular bail in Court of Sessions at Panipat but

2 of 4
14-10-2018 03:39:42 :::
CRM-M-25361-2018 -3-

was unsuccessful as the same was dismissed vide order dated 11.5.2018

passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Panipat, as such, he has

approached this Court for grant of the similar relief.

Notice of the petition was given to the State and State counsel

has put in appearance.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

State counsel besides going through the record.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the

petitioner and the prosecutrix were known to each other for last two years.

They both liked each other and wanted to marry but the complainant was

not ready for that. Both of them had taken poison about 1 ½ years earlier

for that reason but had survived and both the families had agreed to marry

them after the prosecutrix attained the age of 18 years, which she has now

completed on 23.4.2018; that as a matter of fact, no such incident had

taken place; that the petitioner had taken the prosecutrix to the

examination centre, to which the complainant objected and then lodged

the FIR.

Though initially the complainant had stated that the accused

accompanied by 4-5 armed persons had come and misbehaved with the

prosecutrix while she was sitting in the examination hall and trying to

kidnap her but later on by making the supplementary statements the

factum of accused being accompanied by 4-5 armed persons has been

denied. The petitioner was arrested on 10.3.2018. The trial is at

preliminary stage and its conclusion is likely to take some time. The

petitioner on one side and the prosecutrix and her father – the complainant

3 of 4
14-10-2018 03:39:42 :::
CRM-M-25361-2018 -4-

on other side are related to each other. Further, detention of the

petitioner/accused shall not serve any purpose. Therefore, it shall be in the

fitness of things, if regular bail is granted to the petitioner.

Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The petitioner be

admitted to bail during the pendency of the trial, subject to his furnishing

bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Chief

Judicial Magistrate, Panipat, subject to the following conditions:

(i) he shall appear in the Court on each and every date of

hearing;

(ii)he shall not give any threat or intimidation to the

prosecution witnesses; and

(iii)he shall not leave India without prior permission of the

Court and shall surrender his passport, if he has got

one, otherwise to furnish affidavit in that regard.

In addition to that the trial Court may impose any term and

condition found suitable to ensure that the petitioner does not abscond and

interfere in the trial.

In case the petitioner violates any term and condition on

which the bail has been granted to him, the prosecution would be entitled

to apply for cancellation of bail.

12.10.2018 (H.S. MADAAN)
Brij JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No

Whether reportable : Yes/No

4 of 4
14-10-2018 03:39:42 :::

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation