RAVI YADAV Vs. STATE OF C.G

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.172/2022, registered at Police Station - Balrampur, District BalrampurRamanujganj (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sec. 376 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short the "IPC")

(2.) Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the applicant committed sexual intercourse with the prosecutrix on several occasion on false pretext of marriage and thereby committed the offence alleged.

(3.) Shri Manoj Paranjpe learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent, that he has not committed the aforesaid crime, and has been falsely implicated in the case. It is submitted that prosecutrix is a major lady fully capable of understanding of her well-being. He submits that the applicant and the prosecutrix were in relationship for last so many years, and that there is a delay in lodging the FIR as the first alleged incident took place on 1/7/2017 which continued till 1/11/2021. He submits that prosecutrix never made any complaint during this long period, therefore, her statement cannot be believed. According to the counsel for the applicant, FIR was lodged in the month of August 2022, which goes to show that she was a consenting party. He submits that the alleged relationship came to an end in the year 2020 itself. Prosecutrix was demanding huge amount from the applicant and on refusal the FIR was lodged. It is submitted that the prosecutrix is aged about 33 years whereas the applicant is aged about 26 years, therefore, it can not be said that from the very inception the applicant gave false promise to marry her. According to the counsel for the applicant, it is not a case of obtaining consent by fraud or misconception of fact, and that the Medico Legal Report does not support the case of prosecution, therefore, the application may be allowed and the applicant may be granted anticipatory bail. In order to buttress his submissions he placed reliance on the Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Maheshwar Tigga Vs. State of Jharkhand reported in (2020) 10 SCC 108, Pramod Suryabhan Pawar Vs. State of Maharashtra and another reported in (2019) 9 SCC 608, Shivshankar alias Shiva Vs. State of Karnataka and another reported in (2019) 18 SCC 204.