LAWS(P&H)-2022-6-23

SUBHASH RAZAK Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

Decided On June 27, 2022
Subhash Razak Appellant
V/S
STATE OF HARYANA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a first petition under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in FIR no.254 dtd. 10/6/2022 registered under Ss. 376(2)(n), 506 IPC at Police Station Model Town Panipat, District Panipat.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence and the FIR had been registered on 10/6/2022, i.e. after a delay of more than 1 year and 7 months, inasmuch as the alleged incident is stated to be of 1/10/2020 and there is no explanation given with respect to the said delay. It is further submitted that the petitioner and the complainant were in a live-in-relationship regarding which an agreement dtd. 24/12/2020 was also entered into between the petitioner and the complainant, in which it had even been stated that in case any children are born from the live-in- relationship, then both the parties shall be bound to bring up the child. It is further submitted that the FIR has been registered by the complainant behind the petitioner, when the petitioner was not present in Panipat. Further reference has been made to the statement dtd. 20/6/2022 made by the complainant before the Additional Sessions Judge, Panipat in which she has specifically stated that she has no objection in case anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner. It is stated that said fact has also been noticed in the impugned order dtd. 20/6/2022 in paragraph 7. It is further stated that, at any rate, the matter has been finally settled and the petitioner would be filing a petition under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of the FIR on the basis of compromise.

(3.) On advance notice, Mr. Tanuj Sharma, AAG, Haryana, appears and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and has submitted that he is fully prepare to argue the matter and assist this Court. He has opposed the present petition for anticipatory bail and has submitted that in the present case, a perusal of the FIR would show that the complainant has levelled specific allegations as per which the offence of rape is made out.