Please Log in / Register to access the full text of this judgment and the entire database
(2021) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 16086
Decided on: 12.03.2021
Present:
Ms. Arti Kaur, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Rana Harjasdeep Singh, DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Rahul Bhargava, Advocate, for the complainant.
(Proceedings conducted through video conferencing)
Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 363, 366-A, 376, 376-D -- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (32 of 2012), Sections 6, 17 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 -- POCSO case – Rape – Regular bail – Compromise -- Parties are stated to have amicably resolved their issues and while also noticing that the petitioner in any case has been behind bars since the last about 10 months, further detention of the petitioner will not serve any useful purpose -- Petition, as such, accepted and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail.
(Para 6)
***
GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. (ORAL) --
CRM-7332-2021
In view of the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed as prayed for and Annexures P-3 and P-4 are taken on record subject to all just exceptions.
CRM-M-28928-2020 (O&M)
1. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking grant of regular bail in respect of a case registered vide FIR No.46, dated 22.4.2020, Police Station Rahon, District SBS Nagar, under Sections 363, 366-A, 376, 376-D IPC and Sections 6/17 of POCSO Act.
2. The FIR was lodged at the instance of the prosecutrix aged about 16 years wherein allegations are to the effect that on 17.4.2020, the petitioner and Ram Kumar had forcibly taken her to fields and had physically abused her against her wishes.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the FIR came to be lodged under some misunderstanding which has now been resolved and that a settlement has been effected amongst the parties who are closely related. Learned counsel has drawn in this regard the attention of this Court to an agreement/settlement deed dated 6.3.2021 (Annexure P-3).
4. Opposing the petition, learned State counsel has submitted that since serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioner, no case for grant of bail is made out. It has however, been informed that the petitioner as on date has been behind bars since the last about 10-11 months. Learned State counsel has however, feigned ignorance about the alleged compromise.
5. Learned counsel for the complainant has also joined video conference and has admitted the factum of compromise and has stated that he has no objection for grant of bail to the petitioner.
6. In view of the aforestated position, wherein the parties are stated to have amicably resolved their issues and while also noticing that the petitioner in any case has been behind bars since the last about 10 months, further detention of the petitioner will not serve any useful purpose. The petition, as such, is accepted and the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned.
Petition allowed.
********