INDERJEET @ KAMAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CRM-3942-2016

(2.) At the very outset, learned proxy counsel for the petitioner contends that after presentation of the report under Sec. 173, Crimial P.C., the charge for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 354-A and 506, IPC, and Sec. 8 of POCSO Act, were framed by learned Trial Court on 02.12.2015, vide Annexure P-3. He further contends that the maximum sentence which could be awarded under Sec. 8 of POCSO Act, is five years. The petitioner has already suffered incarceration for approximately five months. He is neither involved nor required in any other case involving the sexual offences. He further contends that the earlier petition filed by the petitioner was withdrawn at that stage vide order, dated 07.12.2015.

(3.) Learned counsel for the State has not controverted the factual aspects raised by learned counsel for the petitioner, however, he submits that the trial is proceeding at a fast speed, therefore, the petitioner might not be released on bail.