DUMNU RAM Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Bail petitioner namely Dumnu Ram, who is behind the bars since 4/9/2020, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings filed under Sec. 439 Cr.PC., for grant of regular bail in case FIR 0035, dtd. 13/2/2016, registered at PS Sundernagar, District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh, under Ss. 376 and 452 of the IPC and Sec. 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.

(2.) Pursuant to order dtd. 13/9/2021, passed by this Court, Respondent-State has filed the status report. ASI Rajinder Singh, I.O. P.S. Sundernagar, District Mandi, H.P., is also present with records. Record perused and returned. Close scrutiny of record/status report reveals that on 13/2/2016, victim-prosecutrix presented one complaint at Police Station Sundernagar, alleging therein that on 12/2/2016, she alongwith her father had gone to Slapar Hospital for getting her eye checked. At 2:00pm, her both sisters also met her and thereafter, their father after having purchased some articles asked them to return to their house. She alleged that after some time, she asked her two sisters to come slowly, whereas she went fast and when she reached Dhaarli Village, two boys were sitting there. She alleged that those two boys after having seen her, started moving ahead of her and when she reached home, she directly went to the kitchen, where the bail petitioner, at 4:30 pm, forcibly entered in the kitchen and made an attempt to outrage her modesty. She alleged that the above named person sexually assaulted her against her wishes and while he was wearing his cloths, her mother reached there and slapped both of them. She disclosed that present bail petitioner fled away from the spot and thereafter, entire incident was disclosed to her father when he came back home. In the aforesaid background, FIR as detailed herein above, came to be lodged against the present bail petitioner. Though, after lodging of FIR, bail petitioner remained absconded for almost four years, but subsequently, surrendered on 4/9/2020 and since then, he is behind bars. Since challan stands filed in the competent court of law and statements of victim-prosecutrix and her mother stand recorded, petitioner has approached this Court in the instant proceedings for grant of regular bail

(3.) Mr. Sudhir Bhatnagar, learned Additional Advocate General while fairly admitting factum with regard to filing of challan in the competent court of law and recording of the statements of victim-prosecutrix and as well as her mother, submits that keeping in view the gravity of the offence alleged to have been committed by him, he does not deserve any leniency. Mr. Bhatnagar, submits that though victim-prosecutrix and her mother have resiled from their initial statements given to the police, but there is overwhelming evidence adduced on record by the investigating agency, suggestive of the fact that bail petitioner taking undue advantage of innocence and minority of the victim-prosecutrix sexually assaulted her against her wishes. He further states that otherwise also, consent, if any, of victim-prosecutrix is immaterial and as such, bail petitioner does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. Lastly, Mr. Bhatnagar, submits that since the petitioner has absconded for more than four years, it may not be in the interest of justice to enlarge him on bail at this stage, who in the event of his being enlarged on bail may not only flee from justice, but may also temper with the prosecution evidence and as such, prayer for grant of bail on his behalf may be rejected.