High CourtsSINGLE BENCH(2017) 06 P&H CK 0028

Lokesh @ Lovely vs State of Haryana

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 21 June 2017

HON’BLE JUDGES
Harinder Singh Sidhu
CASE NUMBER
M-21928 of 2017

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

30 paragraphs · 319 words
1.

Lokesh @ Lovely, the petitioner has sought regular bail in a

case FIR No. 120 dated 27.12.2015 at Police Station Women, Sonepat,

District Sonepat, for offence punishable under sections 323, 365, 376,

452, 506 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 6 of Protection of Children

from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.

2.

The allegations in the FIR, lodged by the complainant Bhavna,

are that on 27.12.2015 at 11.00 pm when she came out for urinating, the

petitioner and Pardeep alongwith two other unknown boys entered her

house and forcibly took her and her cousin sister Sweety from the house.

While the complainant Bhavna was taken by Pardeep to his house where he

committed raped with her. Sweety was taken by Lokesh and the other two

unknown boys and Lokesh committed rape with her. They were threatened

that if they disclosed about this incident, the complainant and her family

members would be killed.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the allegations

levelled in the FIR are totally false. In fact the petitioner and his co-accused

(Pardeep) are known to the complainant and Sweety and both of them went

out with them of their own choice.

4.

Admittedly, Sweety, with whom the petitioner is alleged to

have committed rape was 19 years of age on the date of alleged incident. He

further states that the medicolegal report disclosed that no injuries were

present either on the complainant or Sweety.

5.

Learned State counsel on instruction from the Investigating

Officer has informed that 18 witnesses so far have been examined in this

case.

6.

Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner is in custody since

30.12.2015 and no useful purpose would be served to further detain him in

custody, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner be released on

regular bail on his furnishing adequate bail bonds and surety bonds to the

satisfaction of learned CJM/Duty Magistrate Sonepat.