Punjab and Haryana High Court denies relief to 34-year-old who stalked schoolgirl in Thar brandishing gun

A man who hounds a young woman while brandishing a gun can cause serious trauma to the vwoman and her family, the Punjab and Haryana High Court recently observed while denying anticipatory bail to a 34-year-old man who allegedly stalked a class XII student in his Thar jeep and attempted to give her his number at gunpoint..Justice Sumeet Goel said there were serious allegations against the accused and the role of an “unrelenting menacing stalker” attributed to him led to an unequivocal conclusion that he does not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail.“It is imperative that every person in the Society can expect an atmosphere free from foreboding & fear of any transgression. Any such affront to an individual also impacts the family and Society adversely,” it said..The Court thus called for an active deterrence against stalking. Otherwise such acts may vitiate the social order and fabric of society, it said."A man who is hounding a young female while brandishing a gun, poses a threat which can become a cause of disquiet and pernicious trauma for the victim as also her family," the order stated. In the present case, the accused was booked by Moga Police in Punjab for the offences of stalking, criminal intimidation and Arms Act following a complaint by the victim.The victim told the police that on March 3, when she was returning home after giving an examination, the accused along with three of his accomplices started following her near the market and tried to give her his number. The accused Satnam Singh “threatened me at pistol point to get his number, but I did not get his number,” she told the Police. .However, the counsel representing the accused told the Court that he had been falsely implicated in the case and the case was registered after an unexplained delay. It was also submitted that Singh is married and has a child. The Court rejected Singh's plea for pre-arrest bail after noting that the incident had been captured on a CCTV camera..The victim has also articulated her fear of an impending mishap occurring due to the persistent actions of the accused, the order stated.“In view of the egregious nature as also severity of allegations levelled against the petitioner, it may not be possible for the investigating agency to unravel the entire truth including the identity of unknown accomplices as also to recover the gun alleged to have been used by the petitioner, in case petitioner is armed with a protective order,” the Court said as it dismissed the plea..Advocate Naresh Kumar Manchanda represented the accused.