LAWS(DLH)-2014-7-309

JUYAL Vs. STATE

Decided On July 28, 2014
Juyal Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner Mohd. Juyal is brother-in-law (Jeeja) of the victim. The petitioner is seeking regular bail in case of FIR No. 240/2013 registered at Police Station Welcome Colony under Sections 363/367 of IPC & Section 4 POCSO Act claiming that he is in custody in the above noted case since for the last one year i.e. from 26th July, 2013. The petitioner is seeking bail on the ground that in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. of the prosecutrix, the petitioner was not named to be the person who sexually assaulted her. Despite that on the basis of the statement subsequently recorded by the police under Section 161 Cr.P.C. of victim, he had been arrested and charge-sheeted. I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) Perusal of the record shows that FIR no. 240/2013 was registered on the statement of Smt. Taslima, mother of the victim. In the FIR she has mentioned that on 16th July, 2013 at about 3.30 p.m. her daughter who was aged about 15 years and a student of 10th standard, left home for going to the tuition and had not returned thereafter.

(3.) During investigation, after the victim was recovered, she was produced before the learned M.M. for getting her statement recorded. In her statement before the court she specifically stated that she was in love with Faizan. She had physical relationship with the above named person of her own free will and was pregnant having pregnancy of 45 days. She also stated before the learned M.M. that she left the house of her own and though the accused wanted to drop her back to her house on the same day, she insisted to stay with him. She was dropped near her house on the next date. She was categorical in making statement that nobody had kidnapped or enticed her away.