AJAY KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present bail application has been maintained by the petitioner, under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking his release in case FIR No.24 of 2019, dated 2.6.2019, under Sections 452, 354, 354 (A) (1) (i), 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 67-A, of the Information Technology Act, registered at Women Police Station Baddi, District Solan, H.P.

(2.) As per the averments made in the petition, the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is permanent resident of the place and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice. No fruitful purpose will be served by keeping him behind the bars for an unlimited period, so he be released on bail.

(3.) Police report stands filed. The prosecution story, as emanates from the records, is that on 2.6.2019, the prosecutrix (name withheld) alongwith her mother made a written complaint to the police, wherein she alleged that 7-8 days back, when her parents went to the market, she was all alone in her jhuggi (hut), at that time, Ajay Kumar (petitioner herein) came to her hut and started pressing her breasts and also threatened her with dire consequences. The prosecutrix alleged that the petitioner may have also videographed the incident. Upon the complaint, so made by the prosecutrix, police registered a case, under the apt sections and the investigation ensued. Police visited the spot, prepared the spot map and also clicked photographs. The petitioner was arrested and during the course of interrogation, it was unearthed that the petitioner has made a video and the same was sent by him to his relatives. During the course of interrogation and investigation one of the relatives of the prosecutrix produced a pendrive, wherein the petitioner stored the obscene video. The police recorded the statements of the witnesses and also completed all the codal formalities. Police also made the relevant recoveries and scientific samples were sent for forensic analysis. The prosecutrix alleged that the petitioner sexually molested her and also videographed it. As per the police, the medical evidence suggests that the prosecutrix had undergone sexual intercourse, but there is no evidence of recent forceful sexual intercourse. Report qua mobile data has been received from SFSL, Junga. During the course of investigation, it was unearthed that the petitioner committed sexual assault upon the petitioner and also threatened her. Lastly, it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner be dismissed, as the petitioner was involved in a serious offence, and there is possibility that in case at this stage he is enlarged on bail, he may flee from justice and tamper with the prosecution witnesses.