JATINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER seeks concession of pre-arrest bail in a case of gang rape registered at the instance of Seema Rani alleging that on the night of 22nd/ 23rd of June 2010 at about 10/11 p.m. when she had gone out for urinating, petitioner alongwith Surjit Singh and Mohinder Singh. Mohinder Singh had caught-hold of her and committed rape upon her by intoxicating her and she was taken next day in a car before she was dropped.

(2.) COUNSEL for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner has been involved only on account of political rivalry with the father of the prosecutrix. The two witnesses whose names have been incorporated are inimical towards the family of the petitioner; one is having litigation with the mother of the petitioner and the second one has got a civil litigation pending with the father of the petitioner. It has been argued that the story of the prosecutrix is patently improbable. In order to establish the enmity of the father of the prosecutrix, reference has been made to one FIR which was earlier registered by him against the family members of the petitioner and another FIR in which the father of the prosecutrix is a witness against the petitioner in a case of assault. It is submitted that the truthfulness of the allegations mentioned in the FIR is being investigated by the police and 50 persons of the village have made statements to the person holding enquiry to the effect that no incident, as alleged by the prosecutrix has ever taken place.

(3.) ALL the pleas taken up by the petitioner may constitute a good ground for the grant of bail but at this stage when the investigation is at thresh-hold, the petition is dismissed at this stage with liberty to the petitioner to surrender or to approach this Court again on the basis of any favourable investigation report in his favour.