SANJEEV KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant bail application has been maintained by the petitioner, under Sec. 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of bail, in case FIR No. 122/2022, dtd. 19/6/2022, under Ss. 363, 366, 376 of IPC and Sec. 6 of POCSO Act, registered at Police Station Indora, District Kangra, H.P.

(2.) As per the averments made in the petition, the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Further, he is resident of the place and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, so he be released on bail.

(3.) Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution story, on 19/6/2022 mother of the prosecutrix, made a complaint to the police, alleging therein that on 17/6/2022, she and the prosecutrix were in their house, whereas her husband and son had gone outside in connection with their work. After dinner, they went to sleep. However, next morning around 5:00 a.m., when she woke up, she found the prosecutrix missing from the house. She inquired about the prosecutrix in the neighborhood and came to know that the accused (petitioner herein) have kidnapped the prosecutrix, who also took with her Rs.10,000.00. Consequently, FIR No. 122/2022, dtd. 19/6/2022, under Ss. 363, 366, 376 of IPC and Sec. 6 of POCSO Act, came to be registered against the petitioner and the investigation ensued. On 2/7/2022, it was telephonically intimated to the Investigating Officer that the prosecutrix had preferred a petition, i.e. CRWP No. 6317/2022, in the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana for her protection from her parents. Accordingly, the Investigating Officer went in search of the prosecutrix and accused, however, they could not be traced.