SACHIN Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sequel to order dated 3.9.2019, whereby bail petitioner was ordered to be enlarged on interim bail in the event of his arrest in case FIR No. 49/2019, dated 30.8.2019 under Sections 376 and 506 of IPC, registered at police Station, Nankhari, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, SI/SHO Om Prakash, has come present in Court alongwith the record. Mr. Sudhir Bhatnagar, 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.

(2.) Record made available to this Court reveals that on 3.8.2019 complainant/prosecutrix (name withheld to protect her identity) lodged a complaint at police Station, Nankhari, District Shimla, H.P., stating therein that bail petitioner was in her contact for the last one year through facebook. She also alleged that bail petitioner used to talk with her on a phone as well as on facebook, however in the month of April, 2018 he called her at Nankhari and thereafter took her to nearby forest in his car bearing registration No. HP-63-A 2684 and sexually assaulted her against her wishes. Complainant/prosecutrix alleged that bail petitioner used to take money from her on credit basis and as of today, he owes a sum of Rs. Two lac to her. She also levelled allegation against the bail petitioner that she also gave her gold ornaments to him. Allegedly when complainant/prosecutrix asked for refund of money as well as ornaments, bail petitioner snatched her mobile phone and deleted all the messages/chats as well as her contact. In the aforesaid background, prosecutrix sought appropriate action, in accordance with law, against the bail petitioner. On the basis of aforesaid complaint, FIR, as mentioned hereinabove, came to be lodged against the present bail petitioner.

(3.) Mr. Sudhir Bhatnagar, learned Additional Advocate General on the instructions of the Investigating Officer, while fairly acknowledging the factum with regard to joining of investigation by the bail petitioner pursuant to order dated 3.9.2019, contended that though petitioner has presented himself for investigation, but he is not co-operating. Mr. Bhatnagar, learned Additional Advocate General stated that till date petitioner has not given the recovery of money and ornaments allegedly taken by him from the prosecutrix and as such, prayer for grant of bail at this stage, may not be considered. Learned Additional Advocate General further contended that keeping in view the gravity of offence alleged to have been committed by the bail petitioner, he does not deserve any leniency.