KALA ALIAS KRISHAN PAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order will dispose of Crl. M. No. 32977-M of 2000 and Crl. M. No. 32431-M of 2000, in which the petitioners had filed applications for anticipatory bail, after they had been summoned by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Panipat to face their trial in a complaint filed against them at the behest of Sardar Singh, father of Geeta and Kavita, who are stated to have been subjected to sexual inter-course against their wishes, by the petitioners.

(2.) ON 27.9.2000, I have directed the petitioners to put an appearance before the trial Court on or before 6.10.2000, whereupon the said Court would admit them to interim bail. After service of notice on the complainant, the affirmations of this orders are opposed on the ground that this is a case of gang rape during which the petitioners had threatened the minor girls with dire consequences and even thereafter threats are being persisted with against both the girls as well as their parents. Since non-bailable warrants had already been issued against the petitioners, this is not a case in which the orders granting them anticipatory bail should be confirmed. The best which can be said in the favour of the petitioners is that they would be entitled to a direction in terms of law laid down in Salauddin Abdulsamad Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1996 SC 1042 : 1998(2) RCR(Crl.) 96 (SC) and K.L. Verma v. State and another, 1999(1) CLR 259 : 1997(1) RCR(Crl.) 493 (SC).