REETA DEVI Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for releasing the applicant on bail in FIR No.43 of 2007 dated 4.2.2007 registered at Police Station, Palampur, District Kangra (HP) under Sections 372, 376(2)(g), 506 , 120-B IPC read with Sections 5,6 of The Immoral Traffic ( Prevention) Act, 1956.

(2.) THE brief facts are that a copy of Rapat No.9 dated 4.2.2007, Police Station, Joginder Nagar, District Mandi was received on 4.2.2007 at Police Station Palampur. As per rapat prosecutrix 'R' D/o late Pana Lal came along with her grand mother Suti Devi at about 1 p.m. at Police Station and submitted an application to SHO Joginder Nagar. It has been alleged that prosecutrix aged about 14 years used to visit the shop of Partap Chand for purchasing Ration items, his wife Soma Devi one day called prosecutrix at her residence. She persuaded her to visit the house of her (Soma Devi) daughter and ultimately she (Soma Devi) took prosecutrix to the house of Rita Devi applicant at Hara Bagh. She was told that nothing happens by indulging in "Galat Kam" ( sexual intercourse). The applicant has approached upto DSP and police can't do anything. Next day applicant told the prosecutrix to meet her at Baijnath all alone and no body would suspect anything. The applicant later on took prosecutrix to Nagrota in some house. After some time one man came in that house and bolted the door of the room in which prosecutrix was sitting and started touching her. The prosecutrix raised alarm, applicant came from another room and bolted the door from out side.

(3.) HEARD and perused the record. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant has been implicated in a false case. The challan has been put up in the court but keeping in view long list of prosecution witnesses, the trial is likely to be lengthy. The applicant being a woman is entitled to special consideration in law and she is entitled to bail. He has referred to cases Mt. Choki vs. The State [1957 RAJASTHAN 10 (S) AIR V 44 C.4 Jan], Smt. Bimla vs. The State of Haryana, [1982 C.C. Cases 185 (HC), Miss Neeta alias Anita Rani vs.State of Punjab and anr.[Recent C.R. 1983 (1) 218], Smt. Chander Pati Vs. The State of Punjab [Criminal Law Times (12) 1985 156], Bimal Kaur vs. That State of Punjab [Recent Criminal Reports (7) 1986 (1) 277 ], Mohri Devi & Ors. vs State of Haryana [Recent Criminal Reports (8) 1986(2) 286 ], and Priya Patel vs. State of M.P. and Anr. [ AIR 2006 Supreme Court 2639], in support of his contention that woman accused is entitled to special consideration in law for granting bail. The learned Additional Advocate General has opposed the bail application. He has submitted that there are serious allegations against the applicant. She used innocent prosecutrix of tender age for flesh trade. There is specific evidence against applicant in the case.