MAHENDER SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner seeks bail in a case registered under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. He is alleged to have committed rape with the prosecutrix aged about 19 years. The alleged incident had taken place on 9. 1. 2007, report of which was lodged on 18. 7. 2007. Reading of the FIR indicates that both, the prosecutrix and the petitioner were quite close to each other and there were frequent meetings between the two and the same developed into friendship and then they started meeting each other frequently. The petitioner expressed his feeling for her and vouched his love for her and proposed for the marriage to which she agreed. The petitioner would take her out to different places. As is alleged in the FIR, on 9. 1. 2007, the petitioner came to her house saying that it was his birthday and he also brought some beer and soft drinks and insisted the prosecutrix to share drinks with him on his birthday but she declined. Then the petitioner offered her a glass of Limca, which she consumed but became unconscious and when she regained her consciousness she found herself in the bed in naked position.

(2.) FIR further speaks that even thereafter the prosecutrix visited the petitioner. The petitioner would often meet her and take her to his friends where he used to have sexual intercourse without her consent and against her will alluring her that he would marry her soon. These kind of offers went on till last week of April, 2007 when the prosecutrix insisted the petitioner for meeting his parents to discuss the marriage. The petitioner assured her that he will speak to his family but that day never came and he kept on delaying on one pretext or the other. It is further mentioned in the FIR that in May, 2007, the prosecutrix again insisted meeting his family but the petitioner became furious and threatened her that in case she raised hue and cry, he would make posters of her nude photographs and paste in her neighbourhood. She got frightened and went in depression. Reading of the FIR indicates that it was the prosecutrix who was infatuated by the petitioner and that she was all out to marry him but the petitioner declined to agree for the marriage. This led to the filing of the FIR against him.

(3.) PERUSAL of the FIR shows that though she was allegedly raped on 9. 1. 2007, but she again visited the house of the petitioner on 15. 6. 2007 and also his family members to apprise the petitioner and his parents about the promise made by the petitioner to marry her. Reading of the FIR in entirety indicates that she had deeply fallen in love with the petitioner and was infatuated by him. It appears that the petitioner was not as interested as she was and perhaps for that reason he made a complaint to the police on 16. 6. 2007 narrating that she was compelling him to marry her, whereas he wanted to maintain distance with her but the prosecutrix was ringing him up time and again threatening that in case he did not marry her she will commit suicide and hold him responsible for this act.