HANI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 619 dated 13.11.2014 registered under Sections 376,366-A,506,120-B IPC at Police Station Camp Palwal, District Palwal.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the case, whereas, he was not involved. There was delay of one month in lodging of the FIR as the incident occurred on 17.10.2014 and the FIR was registered on 13.11.2014. Learned counsel further contends that the prosecutrix has stated that one Hani has committed rape upon her, whereas, name of the petitioner is Jitender @ Anni and he is not even residing at the address mentioned in the FIR. As per the allegations levelled in the FIR and the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the accused was known to her but still the name was mentioned wrongly and while declining bail to the petitioner these facts have not been considered. There was considerable improvement in the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The petitioner is ready to join the investigation and nothing is to be recovered from him.

(3.) Learned counsel for the respondent-State submits that the petitioner has been declared proclaimed offender vide order dated 3.2.2016 and being proclaimed offender, he is not entitled for anticipatory bail.