SAURABH KANT Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition, the petitioner has sought for the following relief:

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned HCGP for respondent No.1 and perused the material on record. Respondent No.2/Defacto-complainant has remained absent and has not contested the petition.

(3.) A perusal of the material on record will indicate that respondent No.2/defacto-complainant filed the instant complaint on 10/10/2024 which was registered against the petitioner/sole accused for offences punishable under Ss. 376 and 417 IPC. In the complaint, it is specifically contended that the petitioner had sexual intercourse with respondent No.2 on the false pretext/promise of marriage and subsequently did not marry her and thereby committed the aforesaid offences against respondent No.2. In this context, a perusal of the impugned complaint will indicate the same reads as under: