Punjab-Haryana High Court
Praminder Singh Alias Parvinder Singh ... vs State Of Punjab on 31 January, 2014
Author: Rekha Mittal
Bench: Rekha Mittal
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
Crl. Misc. No. M-25528 of 2013(O&M)
Date of Decision: January 31, 2014
Praminder Singh alias Parvinder Singh alias Pinda
---Petitioner
versus
State of Punjab
---Respondent
Coram: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Rekha Mittal
Present: Mr.Vikram Preet Arora, Advocate
for the petitioner
Mr. Neeraj Sharma, Asstt.A.G., Punjab
for respondent-State
***
REKHA MITTAL, J.
CRM-2978-2014 Allowed as prayed for. Statement of the prosecutrix is taken on record.
CRM-M-25528 of 2013 The petitioner prays for grant of regular bail in FIR No. 31 dated 26.2.2013 for offence under Sections 363, 366-A, 354, 376 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station, Sirhind, District Fatehgarh Sahib.
Counsel for the petitioner would contend that the prosecutrix has been examined in the case and as per her statement before the Court below, the allegation against the petitioner is that he attempted to commit rape upon her. It is further argued that the petitioner has been implicated in the crime as he is a close friend of Ranbir Singh @ Vicky, the main accused in the case against whom the prosecutrix has deposed that he committed Saini Paramjit Kaur 2014.02.01 11:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Crl. Misc. No. M-25528 of 2013(O&M) -2- rape upon her. It is further submitted that reading of the statement in its entirety would make it manifest that the prosecutrix had an affair with Ranbir Singh @ Vicky and she had been maintaining physical relationship. Another submission made by counsel is that the petitioner is in custody for the last more than 11 months and is ready to face proceedings in accordance with law.
Counsel for the State of Punjab has not disputed correctness of facts on record.
Without commenting upon the merits of the controversy, bail to the petitioner, on his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court. However, he shall abide by the following conditions:-
(i) he shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; and
(ii) he shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court.
(REKHA MITTAL) JUDGE January 31, 2014 PARAMJIT Saini Paramjit Kaur 2014.02.01 11:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh