VISHAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Case is taken up for hearing through Video Conferencing.

(2.) Prayer in the present petition is for grant of regular bail in the cross version recorded vide Diary No. 220-Dasti dated 18.06.2020 in FIR No. 249 dated 15.06.2020 under Sections 363/366-A/506 IPC & Section 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012 (Sections 370, 370-A, 384, 389 IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act added and Section 4 of the POCSO Act deleted later on), at Police Station Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner alleges false implication of the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been implicated in the present case because of his being the nephew of Suresh Kumar, who was the complainant in the aforesaid FIR, whereas the petitioner has no role to play in the occurrence in question. It is further submitted that the victim while recording her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. did not utter even a single word worth the allegation against the petitioner and that the alleged amount of Rs.2,50,000/- found deposited in the account of the petitioner was the money, which the petitioner had borrowed from Mamchand.