SHANKAR MANGLA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BAIL application of the petitioner has been vehemently opposed by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State as well as learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant that a young girl of 16 years approximately has been duped by the petitioner. Learned counsel submitted that earlier the petitioner misrepresented the prosecutrix that he is her dharam bhai so much so the petitioner used to get Rakhi tied from her and also used to get Tilak on his forehead on Bhaya Dooj and later on by exploiting the confidence of the prosecutrix he took her to Delhi and tried to forge signatures of the prosecutrix on some papers so much so some photographs were also allegedly obtained. Learned counsel further submitted that threat was hurled to the prosecutrix by the petitioner on the false plea that he is married with the prosecutrix.

(2.) KEEPING in view the facts of the case prima facie it appears that the prosecutrix is more than 16 years. It will be debatable issue, whether the prosecutrix left the house of her own accord or duped, as alleged by the prosecution. The petitioner has already been granted interim bail vide order dated 24.9.1998 passed by Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.C. Malte. In pursuance to the direction, the petitioner has also joined the investigation. In these circumstances, a case of custodial interrogation in public interest is not made out. Resultantly directions dated 24.9.1998 are hereby confirmed. The conditions already contained therein shall also remain enforceable. The petitioner is directed not to harass the prosecutrix directly or indirectly. If he violates any of the conditions of this order, it will be open to the State or the prosecutrix to make an application for cancellation of bail of the petitioner. The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer at 11 A.M. on 3.11.1998 in the police station. Bail allowed.