CRM-M-17537-2018 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-17537-2018
Date of decision:-3.10.2018
Wasim
…Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana
…Respondent
CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE H.S. MADAAN
Present: Mr. R.S. Mamli, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr.Gaurav Bansal, AAG, Haryana.
****
H.S. MADAAN, J. (Oral)
This petition has been filed for the grant of regular bail to the
petitioner – Wasim, an accused in FIR No.598 dated 12.10.2017, under
Sections 120-B, 342, 363, 366, 376, 506 IPC, registered at Police Station
City, Yamuna Nagar.
Briefly stated, the facts of the case, as per prosecution version
are that the FIR in question was recorded on the basis of written complaint
submitted by the the prosecutrix (name withheld to protect her identity in
view of Section 228-A IPC and as per the directions given by the Hon’ble
Apex Court Court in case titled State of Karnataka Vs. Puttaraja, 2004(1)
1 of 5
07-10-2018 08:56:52 :::
CRM-M-17537-2018 -2-
RCR(Cri.) Supreme Court, 113 (SC) and referred to as the prosecutrix)
daughter of Kamal Kaushik, resident of Ashok Gali, Anand Colony,
Purana Hamida, Yamuna Nagar, in which she stated that accused Wasim
has been residing in front of her house and she had been on talking terms
with him; that a few days earlier, he by sitting besides her took her
photographs and thereafter started blackmailing her asking her to develop
relations with him; the prosecutrix under threat of blackmail kept quiet;
that Wasim called her to his house and committed rape on her repeatedly
on several occasions, lastly on 13.9.2017 at night; that on 30.9.2017 at
night when prosecutrix went to the house of Wasim, then she came across
one Ashraf, who threatened to inform her parents, otherwise she should
pillion ride on his motorcycle; the complainant refused but Ashraf made
her sit on his motorcycle and took her to Saharanpur; that she was kept in
a house; on the next day Ashraf along with his brother Matlu and Matlu’s
wife Nazia along with one Gullo went to the prosecutrix and took her
signatures on various papers by exerting force upon her; then they took
her to Saharanpur Court; she was brought back and kept in a house, which
used to be locked all the time; that Ashraf was to take her to Allahabad to
marry her; that one day finding an opportunity, the prosecutrix escaped
from that place, informed her family and her father came along with the
police.
On the basis of said complaint, formal FIR was registered.
The investigation in the case started. Accused were arrested in this case.
After completion of investigation, challan against the accused has been
prepared and filed in the Court and the trial against the accused is going
2 of 5
07-10-2018 08:56:52 :::
CRM-M-17537-2018 -3-
on. He had moved an application for regular bail in Court of Sessions at
Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri but was unsuccessful as the same was
dismissed vide order dated 22.3.2018 passed by learned Additional
Sessions Judge (Exclusive Court for Heinous Crimes Against Women and
Children), Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri, 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.
During the course of trial, the statement of the prosecutrix
was recorded as PW3, wherein she did not support the prosecution story at
all and rather stated that she is 20 years old and on 30.9.2017, she had
gone to Saharanpur in search of some job without informing her parents
and she returned to her house after 12 days. She further stated that she was
having friendly relations with accused Wasim and she along with accused
Ashraf and Wasim went to Saharanpur in search of job, where they stayed
in a house of Matloob; that Mustkim is also friend of accused Ashraf; that
Gullo is wife of accused Amir so called brother of accused Ashraf. She
stated that Ashraf and Wasim did not commit any bad act with her and the
other accused had not taken her to Saharanpur Court and had not
compelled her to put signatures on blank papers. They did not extend any
threat to her. She was declared a hostile witness at the instance of Public
Prosecutor and the Public Prosecutor was allowed to put questions to her
in the form of cross-examination but without any fruitful result.
3 of 5
07-10-2018 08:56:52 :::
CRM-M-17537-2018 -4-
It being so, the star witness of the prosecution having let it
down that cause a severe jolt to the case of prosecution, though the trial
Court is yet to give its verdict keeping in view the totality of the evidence
brought on the record in light of the facts and circumstances of the case
but I find that it shall be in the fitness of things, if the petitioner is granted
benefit of bail since statement of crucial witness, the prosecutrix has
already been recorded and conclusion of the trial is likely to take some
time and further the culpability of the accused shall be determined during
the trial.
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, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri, 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;
(iii)he shall not leave India without prior permission of the
Court.
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
4 of 5
07-10-2018 08:56:52 :::
CRM-M-17537-2018 -5-
to apply for cancellation of bail.
This petition stands allowed accordingly.
3.10.2018 (H.S. MADAAN)
Brij JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
5 of 5
07-10-2018 08:56:52 :::
