SUBE SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Prayer in the present petition filed under Sec. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.234 dtd. 29/5/2018 under Sec. 346 IPC and Ss. 376 and 406 IPC (added later on) registered at Police Station Rai, District Sonepat.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the alleged occurrence had taken place on 21/5/2018 whereas the FIR in question was registered on 29/5/2018 and the petitioner is in custody since 31/5/2018. Initially, the FIR was registered under Sec. 346 IPC but at a later stage, Ss. 376 and 506 IPC were also added. He has argued that as per the FIR, which was registered by Rajiv i.e. husband of the prosecutrix (Rekha). She had gone somewhere without informing the complainant and had taken Rs.7.5 lacs along with her. The complainant is a small time tea vendor and allegation of taking away such a huge amount by Rekha is well motivated.

(3.) Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Rajesh Kumar, submits that though the prosecutrix in her statement under Sec. 164 CrPC has not stated about rape, however, on the same day, when she made her statement under Sec. 161 CrPC, she has narrated the factum of rape having been committed upon her. The amount carried away by Rekha was Rs.75,000.00 and not Rs.7.5 lacs.