23.01.2025 Date o Kamlesh Ch sh Chaudhari v. State of Hary Haryana
Case Details
CRM-M-257 2579-2025 -1- IN THE HIG E HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HA ND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 207 CRM-M-2579-2025 CRM Date of Decision: 23.01.2025 Date o Kamlesh Ch sh Chaudhari .… Petitioner Versus State of Hary Haryana .... Respondent CORAM: H M: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDH NIDHI GUPTA Present: -
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Anmol Sharma, Advocate f ocate for the petitioner. Mr. Dushyant Saharan, AAG, H AG, Haryana. NIDHI GUP I GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The petitioner has filed the pre he present 2nd petition under 483 of 3 of the Bharatiy aratiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 20 ita, 2023, for grant of regular bail in case FIR e FIR No. 83 dated 07.04.2023 (An nder 3 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 37 376(2)(n) and 506 IPC and Sec of d Section 4 of the Protection of Children fro en from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 ct’) 2012 (for short-‘the POCSO Act’) (deleted late ed later on) and Section 6 of the POC at he POCSO Act (added later on) at Police Statio Station Sadar Panipat, District Panipa Panipat. Learned counsel for the petition said petitioner submits that the aforesaid FIR (Annexu nnexure P-1) was registered on the b d by the basis of a complaint moved by the mother other of the victim and the releva s as relevant portion thereof, reads as follows:- “…..Sir, it is submitted that I, nt t I, xxxx wife of xxxx, am resident of village Dadlana, Panipat. I and two sons. My 4th daughter birth is 10.01.2006, has recent rs at. I am having three daughters of hter, namely, xxxx, whose date of cently appeared in exams for 10th class. My daughter xxxx was su en as suffering from pain in abdomen RISHU KATARIA 2025.01.23 18:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-257 2579-2025 -2- since last many days and d ed d despite getting her provided medicines from the doctor, abd abdominal pain of xxxx could not be stopped. Today, I strictly ma ter ly made inquiry from my daughter xxxx, then, she disclosed that s al hat she has missed her menstrual periods since last 2/3 mon er months. When I made further discussion with my daughter he hter in this context, then, she disclosed that a boy, residin ly, iding in our neighbour, namely, Kamlesh, a resident of Panna sh, nna District in Madhya Pradesh, when she had gone to his child sh children in his hut, then, Kamlesh had made physical relations w es ns with me forcibly several times and asked me that if this fact w e, ct would be disclosed to any one, then, I will kill your family m de ily members. Kamlesh has made physical relations with my dau my daughter xxxx forcibly. I got my application scribed and the sam re e same has been presented before you. Legal action against Ka nd t Kamlesh may be initiated and justice may be got imparted to u to us.…..” Learned counsel for the petitio petitioner, inter alia, submits that bare reading eading of the aforesaid FIR (Annexur e of nnexure P-1) shows that the date of incident or th nt or the place of occurrence has not b . At not been mentioned in the FIR. At the time of o e of occurrence, the victim was mor reas as more than 17 years old; whereas the petitione titioner was 24 years of age. Further, it erial ther, it is submitted that the material witnesses i.e ses i.e. the victim and the complainan ined lainant have already been examined before the le the learned trial Court. The petitione ost titioner has been in custody almost for 02 years. years. He is not involved in any othe that y other case. Thus, it is prayed that he may be re y be released on regular bail. Per Contra, learned counsel ntly ounsel for the State vehemently opposes the es the prayer for grant of regular bail mits ar bail to the petitioner and submits that at the t t the time of recovery of victim, she , the , she was pregnant. However, the pregnancy w ncy was terminated later on and DNA us is DNA report with regard to fetus is RISHU KATARIA 2025.01.23 18:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-257 2579-2025 -3- still awaited waited. It is further submitted that ent that the victim in her statement recorded und ed under Section 164 Cr.P.C. as also the as also in her testimony before the learned trial d trial Court as PW-1 has fully suppo tion. supported the case of prosecution. The compla omplainant as PW-8 before the le also the learned trial Court has also supported th rted the prosecution case. On instruct mar, nstructions from SI Yogesh Kumar, learned coun d counsel for the State has informed th tion med that out of total 21 prosecution witnesses, 1 ses, 16 witnesses have been examin sses amined, so far; and 05 witnesses remain to be to be examined. Learned counsel for the State f ated State files custody certificate dated 22.01.2025 2025 which is taken on record, as per een as per which the petitioner has been in custody as tody as an undertrial for a period of 01 . 01 year, 09 months and 14 days. Perusal of th l of the custody certificate shows that lved s that the petitioner is not involved in any other other case. I have heard learned counsel for sel for the parties. Without commenting on merits ping merits of the case, however, keeping in view the w the totality of the facts and circums ircumstances of the case, including: (a) custody p stody period of 01 year, 09 months the and 14 days undergone by the petitioner as ner as an undertrial; (b) perusal of cu that l of custody certificate reveals that the petitione titioner is not involved in any other c ness other case; (c) that material witness i.e. the victi victim and complainant already stan t of dy stands examined; and (d) out of total 21 pros prosecution witnesses, 16 witnesse the tnesses have been examined by the learned tria d trial Court, so far, therefore, take re, conclusion of trial will take considerable erable time, and no useful purpose ther rpose would be served by further detention of ion of the petitioner. Thus, the present resent petition is allowed. RISHU KATARIA 2025.01.23 18:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CRM-M-257 2579-2025 -4- The petitioner-Kamlesh Chaud ered Chaudhari S/o Bahorilal, is ordered to be release released on regular bail on his furnis the furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction ction of the trial Court/Chief Judicial rate, udicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, rned. concerned. However, it is made clear that ll be r that nothing stated above shall be construed as ued as an expression of opinion on the on the merits of the case. 2025 23.01.2025 rishu ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No RISHU KATARIA 2025.01.23 18:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.