YASHBIR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner is a Constable in the Haryana Police. He has business dealings with the husband of the complainant/prosecutrix. According to the petitioner the allegations of rape leveled by the prosecutrix are false. In fact, the prosecutrix had earlier got registered FIR No.50 dated 8.3.2010 (Annexure-P.1) for the offences under Sections 376 and 506 IPC at Police Station Beri. In the said FIR, the prosecutrix made a statement (Annexure-P.2) on 10.3.2010 before the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jhajjar in terms of Section 164 Cr.P.C. submitting that the petitioner had not committed rape on her. She also deposed an affidavit dated 4.2.2010 (Annexure-P.3) in which she retracted from the allegations of rape. Thereafter, the present FIR has been registered on 7.5.2010 in which also the prosecutrix made a statement (Annexure-P.5) under Section 164 Cr.P.C. before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhajjar that she does not want to proceed against the petitioner. On the basis of the said statement the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jhajjar vide order dated 12.8.2010 (Annexure-P.7) granted interim bail which has been declined vide order dated 10.9.2010.

(2.) Learned counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Balbir Singh, Police Station Beri, District Jhajjar, has submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation. One Mobile phone, `750/- in cash and one motorcycle on which the complainant has alleged that she was forced to sit as also the registration copy of the said motorcycle have been recovered. It is submitted that custody of the petitioner is not required for the purposes of investigation.

(3.) In the circumstances, the interim bail granted on 20.9.2010 is made absolute.