Alok Singh, J.@mdashThis is an application seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 93 dated 23.6.2010 under Sections 363/363-A/376/34 IPC, P.S. Sadar Abohar, District Ferozepur.
FIR reads as under:
Statement of Seems Rani D/o Sh. Gurdeep Singh, caste Rai Sikh, resident of Pattreanwala, P.S. Sadar Abohar, District Ferozepur, aged about 15 years. It is stated that I am a resident of above-mentioned address and do the household work. I have studied upto 6th class. Last night, me and my aunt Rano Bai had taken our dinner and were sleeping in the verandah on different beds. My father and mother had gone to my mother''s maternal village Tutanwali. Both my brothers had gone somewhere regarding work. At about 10/11 PM, I woke up for urination and went near the wall then from the other side of the wall Jatinder Singh @ Babbu S/o Surjit Singh, Surjit Singh himself i.e. farther of Jatinder @ Babbu, Mohinder Singh, uncle of Jatinder Singh @ Babbu and their labourer Mohinder Singh s/o Banta Singh, Caste Rai Sikh residents of Pattreanwala came out suddenly. Babbu covered my mouth with his hand. Labourer Mohinder Singh caught hold my both arms, Mohinder Singh and Surjit Singh caught hold my both legs and took me away to the room constructed in their fields. And forced me to drink a cup of tea in which they had diluted some drugs. Mohinder Singh and Surjit Singh went out of the room. Initially, Babbu removed my clothes against my wishes and used force against me. Then labourer Mohinder Singh committed a rape against my wishes. Then in the morning at about 4.00 AM Babbu and others took me out of the room and made me sit in the car. Babbu was driving the car. Labourer Mohinder Singh was sitting on the front seat. I was made to sit on the back seat and Mohinder Singh and Surjit Singh were sitting on my right side and left side. Then Babbu was driving the car and they reached = miles away from Ajamwala Bridge on Gang Canal through kacha path. Then they saw some persons coming from the opposite sides and Babbu etc. disembarked me out of the car and ran away from the spot along with their car. I was afraid and reached by walking to my uncle Tarlok Singh house at about 9/9.30 AM at village Pattreanwala and narrated whole of the story to my whole family. They arranged the vehicle and moved an application to the SDM, Abohar and got conducted my medical examinations in Civil Hospitals, Abohar. Now me along with father Gurdeep Singh and president Kuldeep Kaur w/o Pritam Singh resident of Pattreanwala have met you and have recorded the statement. The motive behind all this is that above said Babbu etc. had caused injury to my father and a case regarding that is pending in the Court. Babbu etc. were pressurizing us for compromise, but we had not compromised the matter. Due to this reason just to disrepute us, they with their common intentions have committed a rape with me against my wishes. Action may kindly be taken against them. Statement has been written, heard and found it correct.
Sd/- Seema Rani.
2. Learned Counsel for the accused contends that story set up by the prosecutrix seems to be improbable. He contends that it is ordinarily presumed that in Indian Society, a girl shall not make false or incorrect statement that she was subjected to rape, however, her statement should not always be taken as gospel truth. He states that in the case in hand, prosecutrix is admitting that the motive behind all this is that above said Babbu etc. had caused injury to my father and a case regarding that is pending in the Court. Babbu etc. were pressurizing us for compromise, but we had not compromised the matter. Due to this reason just to disrepute us they with their common intentions have committed a rape with me against my wishes.
3. According to learned Counsel for the accused, Mohinder Singh and accused Surjit Singh both s/o Hardit Singh are real brothers and accused Jatinder Singh @ Babbu is real son of Surjit Singh and real nephew of the Petitioner while accused Mohinder Singh s/o Buta Singh is servant of other accused. Learned Counsel contends that it is not possible that two elderly brothers would have kidnapped the prosecutrix with the help of their younger son Jatinder Singh and servant Mohinder Singh and would have allowed son and servant to commit rape on the prosecutrix in their presence. He further contends that Superintendent of Police has not found Surjit Singh, father of co-accused jatinder Singh @ Babbu and Mohinder Singh servant involved in the crime, therefore, entire story set up by the prosecutrix is highly doubtful and improbable.
4. Varinder Singh, Superintendent of Police. Abohar is present in Court in person. He states that during investigation, enquiry was marked to Ashok Kumar. Deputy Superintendent of Police, Balluana. He further states that Ashok Kumar, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Balluana in the enquiry report has opined that present Petitioner is not involved in the offence in question. He further states that enquiry made by Ashok Kumar, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Balluana was then sent to him for verification. On the verification, he has opined that Petitioner was involved in the present offence alongwith his nephew Jatinder Singh and has not found the brother of Petitioner i.e. Surjit Singh and labourer Mohinder Singh involved in the present offence.
5. SI Kuldeep Singh, Investigating Officer is present in Court in person and states that as per the investigation carried out by him and by the previous Investigating Officers, present accused is found involved in the offence alongwith his nephew Jatinder Singh. He further states that P.O. proceedings are going on against the present accused.
6. Learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab, on instructions of the Superintendent of Police and the Investigating Officer, who are present in person, states that prosecutrix was taken by the Petitioner alongwith co-accused in the room, however, Petitioner stood guard outside the room and did not commit any rape.
7. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner states that Petitioner would not have committed rape in the presence of his nephew - co-accused Jatinder Singh.
8. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner further states that neither taking the prosecutrix forcefully for committing rape by the Petitioner in the company of his nephew is possible nor it is possible that Petitioner would have allowed his nephew to commit rape, while he stood guard outside the room. He further states that Petitioner has been implicated in the present case because of political rivalry.
9. It is true that in the Indian Society, it is ordinarily presumed that no lady would state against her own reputation. Rape in our society carries stigma on the prosecutrix and after rape, prosecutrix shall not lead normal life. However, in the Indian Society, two real brothers would have not joined their son and servant in kidnapping and rape of the girl.
Superintendent of Police has not found Surjit Singh father of the co-accused Jatinder Singh and brother of present Petitioner involved in the crim. Labourer Mohinder Singh s/o Buta Singh is also found innocent by the Superintendent of Police. As per prosecution story, present Petitioner uncle (Chacha) stood guard while nephew Jatinder Singh (Bhatija) has committed rape in the room. Entire story set up by the prosecutrix is not found true by the police.
10. Learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab states that investigation against the Petitioner is complete and only challan is to be presented. Custodial interrogation is not required at this stage.
11. Considering totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, present petition is allowed. I direct the Petitioner shall be enlarged on bail to the satisfaction of the CJM.
12. However, it is clarified that every discussion and observation made here-in-above is solely for the purpose of deciding bail application and shall not prejudice the trial.
