DEEPU Vs. STATE OF U.T., CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has approached this Court seeking grant of regular bail in respect of a case registered vide FIR No.40 dated 6.2.2019 at Police Station Sector 36, Chandigarh under Sections 376(2)N, 370 and 34 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of POCSO Act wherein challan has been presented under Sections 376(D)A, 370 and 34 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 6, 8 and 16 of POCSO Act.

(2.) The FIR was lodged at the instance of prosecutrix, wherein it has been alleged that in the month of November 2016 her parents brought her as well as her brothers and sisters to Chandigarh for doing the work of making home made 'ghee'. It is alleged that they resided in the house of Kiran Vinodiya, where his wife Rekha and son Deepu also resided. It is alleged that in the month of January 2017, one day when all other members of the family had gone out for selling 'ghee' and she was alone at home, then Deepu, while holding out a promise to marry her, forcibly established physical relations with her and thereafter continued with the said physical relations while issuing threats to her. It is alleged that when she tried to escape from that place, then she was given beatings by Kiran Vinodiya, Rekha Vinodiya and Deepu, who told her that they had paid an amount of Rs. 1.5 lacs to her parents and that she would be required to stay there and work for them. It is thus alleged by the prosecutrix that her parents left her in the house of Kiran Vinodiya and Rekha Vinodiya after taking an amount of Rs. 1.5 lacs and that Deepu had been having physical relations with her right from January 2017 till 26.8.2018.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case and that in fact he is a juvenile. It has further been submitted that, in any case, the petitioner has been behind bars since the last about 8 months and although charges have been framed but till date not even a single prosecution witness out of the cited 18 prosecution witnesses has been examined.