RAM SARUP Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) COUNSEL for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is in jail for the last more than 8 -1/2 months. It has been brought to the notice of the Court that when statement of the prosecutrix was recorded by the Magistrate under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she had exonerated the petitioner. By referring to the contents of the statement made by her in Court, it has been stated that it was a case of consent. Even as per allegations, she had gone from one place to another and had even travelled in the train. Certificate Annexure P-3 has been shown to say that age of the prosecutrix was more than 16 years at the time of alleged offence. Recording of statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and authenticity of the certificate have not been controverted by the State counsel, on getting instructions from ASI Ishwar Dass. COUNSEL for the petitioner states that only one witness has been examined twenty more remain to be examined and it will take a long time before trial is finally heard and decided. Without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this petition is allowed and during pendency of the trial, petitioner is directed to be released on bail to the satisfaction of the trial Court. Copy of the order be given Dasti on payment of usual charges.