RITESH SHAH Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Applicant has preferred this application under Sec. 438 of CrPC for grant of anticipatory bail as he apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No. 207/2021 registered at Police Station Telibandha, Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Ss. 376, 376(2)(N) and 377 of IPC.

(2.) As per the case of prosecution, in brief- complainant has lodged a written complaint before the SHO, police station Kanker on 9/6/2021 levelling allegations against the present applicant of making physical relationship with her without her consent initially in the month of January 2015. After commission of act, applicant stated her that do not disclose the incident to anyone else, he would perform marriage with her in that year itself. Applicant introduced the complainant with his mother showing his intention of marrying the complainant. Thereafter, applicant on the pretext of marriage again made forceful physical relationship with her, this was intimated to mother of applicant. Mother of applicant suffered with cancer disease, therefore, marriage could not be performed. Complainant got the government job and she was posted at Kanker. She shifted to Kanker from Raipur upon her posting where also the applicant came there on number of occasions in her rental house and made physical relationship with her. Applicant took her to Visakhapatnam in the month of December 2017 and stayed in a hotel for couple of days and in May 2018 to Kanha forest, stayed in the hotel for couple of days and there also he made physical relationship with her on the pretext of marriage. But whenever she talks about their marriage, applicant for one or other reason avoided it. Applicant continuously made physical relationship with her for five years on the ground that he would marry her. Later on, he refused to marry with complainant. Relationship of complainant and the applicant was also known to her friends as well. When on 14/5/2021, complainant went to the house of applicant and stated that he made physical relationship with her on the false pretext of marriage and now he is refusing to marry her. Upon calling by applicant, one girl Seema Sahu along with Manoj Sahu also came there and they have threatened the complainant of life and also abused her. The applicant on the pretext of marriage has committed sexual intercourse with her since January 2015 to May 2020 against her will. Based on the complaint, instant crime was registered against the present applicant for the aforementioned offence.

(3.) Mr. Praful N. Bharat, learned senior counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant has met with the complainant in the year 2012 while he was working in contract in one of the Government departments where the applicant has to visit on account of his business dealing. At one point of time, in the year 2013, applicant met with complainant and proposed the complainant for marriage to which she refused on the ground that she wanted to marry some other person and thereafter the matter ended at that time. He further submits that thereafter in the year 2015-16, applicant again came in contact with complainant though he wanted to marry her initially but looking to her behavior and conduct as reflecting in the mobile chats filed along with application, applicant has changed his mind. He referred to some of the copies of mobile chats placed on record to argue that the complainant was not intended to stay in a joint family with his mother and brother. Applicant is alone to take care to his mother who is suffering from cancer and a brother who is not well settled in his life. He also referred to the chats placed along with covering memo to argue that the complainant after sometime of relationship started harassing and abusing not only the applicant but also the family members, hence in view of the conduct and act of the complainant it was not possible for the applicant to marry her. He also argued that the complainant herself had sent photographs of some of girls mentioning therein that he could marry with any of them which shows that the complainant herself was not interested to marry with applicant. Earlier also the complainant developed physical relationship with one boy by name Bhupendra Thakur as she was in the love affair with that boy. Against Bhupendra Thakur also similar allegations were levelled of making forceful physical relationship against her will on the pretext of marriage. In support of this contention, he places reliance upon document Annexure A-2 and Annexure A-3 which are the copies of F.i.R. bearing crime no. 34/2014 and the copy of evidence of complainant recorded in that crime before the Trial Court on 29/1/2015. He also submitted that in that case, Bhupendra Thakur was acquitted from the charges levelled against him.