MANOJ KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Bail petitioner namely Manoj Kumar, who is in custody since 3.12.2017, has approached this Court for grant of regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in case FIR No.112 of 2017, dated 3.12.2017, under Sections 366, 376, 504 of the Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station, Arki, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh.

(2.) Sequel to orders dated 19.12.2017 and 2.1.2018, SI/SHO Ganga Ram, Police Station, Arki, has come present in Court alongwith the record of the case. Mr. Rajat Chauhan, learned Law Officer, has also placed on record status report prepared on the basis of the investigation carried out by the investigating agency.

(3.) Perusal of the record/status report suggest that FIR, detailed hereinabove, came to be lodged at police Station, Arki at the behest of the complainant/prosecutrix, who alleged that on 2.12.2017, she had come to attend retirement party of her father and at around 7:00 PM, bail petitioner, who was known to her, had telephonically called her on the road. Complainant/ prosecutrix alongwith her cousin namely Usha came on the road to meet the bail petitioner, whereafter bail petitioner allegedly took both of them in his car bearing No.HP-11-A-1678 towards Chhibbar. Subsequently, bail petitioner dropped Usha i.e. cousin of complainant/prosecutrix and thereafter he alongwith prosecutrix proceeded towards Chhibbar. Complainant further alleged that the bail petitioner threatened her by showing knife and compelled her to solemnize marriage with him. Complainant/ prosecutrix apprehending danger to her life, agreed to aforesaid proposal of marriage given by the bail petitioner and thereafter they both proceeded towards Parwanoo. As per the record/status report, bail petitioner as well as prosecutrix while going towards Parwanoo had their dinner in one Dhaba at Dharampur, whereafter they stayed at one Hotel, near petrol pump, Parwanoo. Complainant/ prosecutrix further alleged that bail petitioner on the pretext of marriage, sexually assaulted her and thereafter on the next day dropped her at her village. Complainant/prosecutrix has also alleged that now bail petitioner is refusing to marry her and as such, appropriate action may be taken against him, in accordance with law.