SUSHIL KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Bail petitioner namely, Sushil Kumar, who is behind the bars since 7.2.2018, has approached this Court in the instant proceedings filed under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 praying therein for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.37 of 2018, dated 5.2.2018, under Sections 363, 376 of Penal Code and Sec. 4 of the Protection of Children from 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Sexual Offences Act, registered at police Station, Sadar District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh.

(2.) Sequel to orders dated 5th/11th Oct., 2018, SI Pawan Kumar, has come present along with the record. Mr. Dinesh Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General has also placed on record status report, prepared on the basis of the investigation carried out by the Investigating Agency. Record perused and returned.

(3.) Record/status report reveals that FIR, detailed herein above, came to be lodged at the behest of mother of the prosecutrix, who alleged that her minor daughter, who at the time of alleged incident was 17 years and 11 months old, has been kidnapped by some unknown person. On the basis of aforesaid complaint having been filed by the complainant, police made certain inquires, but fact remains that on 6.2.2018 daughter of the complainant herself returned back to her residence and disclosed to her mother that bail petitioner took her to one hotel last night and sexually assaulted her. After recording the statement of the complainant, police registered a case against the bail petitioner under Sections 363, 376 of Penal Code and Sec. 4 of the POCSO Act.