PRINCE 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. 17 of 2017, dated 03.02.2017, under Section 376(1) of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as "IPC"), registered at Police Station Barsar, District Hamirpur, H.P.

(2.) As per the petitioner, he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. 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 may be released on bail.

(3.) Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution, on 03.02.2017 the prosecutrix made a complaint to the police alleging that during the year 2014 when she was doing B.Ed. from Deen Dayal B.Ed College, Mahrey, Ms. Seema Sharma, who was teacher in the same college, got her engaged with the petitioner and after the consent of both the families on 02.06.2015 shagun etc. were exchanged and marriage was fixed on 08.12.2015. As per the prosecutrix, on 05.06.2015, the mother of the petitioner called her to meet the petitioner, as he has to go in 3-4 days. On being insisted, the prosecutrix went in a room to talk with the petitioner and the petitioner gave her Patanjali juice. After consuming the juice, she felt giddiness. When she regained consciousness, her clothes were on a side and the petitioner said her not to make noise and he will marry her. The petitioner also said that he was under fear of loosing her, so he did so. Thereafter, the petitioner dropped her home. On 11.09.2015, the petitioner took her to his home and there also he committed forcible sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix. On 11.10.2015, the parents of the petitioner declined to marry the prosecutrix and the petitioner. As the petitioner was abroad, the prosecutrix made the complaint on 23.01.2016, but the petitioner occultly married someone else. As per the prosecutrix, the petitioner on the pretext of marrying her, committed sexual intercourse with her. On the basis of the complaint, so filed by the prosecutrix, police machinery was set into motion, the prosecutrix was medically examined. The spot map was prepared and the statement of the prosecutrix was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The clothes of the prosecutrix, which were taken into possession by the police, were sent for forensic examination. As per the information received from Regional Passport Office, Shimla, on 20.20.2017 the petitioner returned from Spain and on 21.10.2017 he was arrested. The petitioner was also medically examined. As per the police, the petitioner is very clever person. The challan is yet to be presented in the Court. Lastly, it has been prayed that in case the petitioner is enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice. As the petitioner has committed serious crime, he may not be enlarged on bail and the application may be dismissed.