MOHINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No.93 dated 23.6.2010 under Sections 363/363-A/376/34 IPC, P.S. Sadar Abohar, District Ferozepur. FIR reads as under :-

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the accused contends that story set up by the prosecutrix seems to be improbable. He contends that it is ordinarily presumed that in Indian Society, a girl shall not make false or incorrect statement that she was subjected to rape, however, her statement should not always be taken as gospel truth. He states that in the case in hand, prosecutrix is admitting that the motive behind all this is that above said Babbu etc. had caused injury to my father and a case regarding that is pending in the Court. Babbu etc. were pressurizing us for compromise, but we had not compromised the matter. Due to this reason just to disrepute us, they with their common intentions have committed a rape with me against my wishes.

(3.) VARINDER Singh, Superintendent of Police, Abohar is present in Court in person. He states that during investigation, enquiry was marked to Ashok Kumar, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Balluana. He further states that Ashok Kumar, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Balluana in the enquiry report has opined that present petitioner is not involved in the offence in question. He further states that enquiry made by Ashok Kumar, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Balluana was then sent to him for verification. On the verification, he has opined that petitioner was involved in the present offence alongwith his nephew Jatinder Singh and has not found the brother of petitioner i.e. Surjit Singh and labourer Mohinder Singh involved in the present offence.