VINOD KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present bail application has been moved by the petitioner under Sec. 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for releasing him on bail, in the event of his arrest, in case FIR No. 49 of 2019, dtd. 24/3/2019, under Ss. 363, 366, 376, 342, 506 IPC and Sec. 4 of the POCSO Act, registered in Police Station Nagrota, 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. He is resident of Shimla 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 story, on 24/3/2019 police received a complaint made by the prosecutrix (name withheld), wherein she stated that the petitioner asked her to meet him at Kangra, so on 23/3/2019 she came to Kangra. The petitioner took the prosecutrix towards Jawalaji in a bus of Shimla. As per the prosecutrix, the petitioner made her to drink cold drink and thereafter she fell asleep. When she woke up, she was in a bus and reached Darlaghat. The petitioner took her to Solan and made her to stay in a room. The petitioner thrashed her and also took her phone and money. On the subsequent night, the petitioner again made her to forcibly drink some drink and that night he sexually molested her. The petitioner clicked her photographs and also made video and started threatening her on the pretext of photographs and video not to divulge the incident to any one. On the complaint, so made by the prosecutrix, a case was registered and investigation ensued. The prosecutrix refused to get herself medically examined. The statement of the prosecutrix was recorded under Sec. 164 Cr.P.C. Police procured the records qua the date of birth of the prosecutrix. Police also recorded the statements of the witnesses and prepared the spot map.