GULFARM Vs. STATION HOUSE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein has been arrayed as the sole accused in the instant Crime No.1258/2019 of Ernakulam Central Police Station, which has been registered for the offences punishable under Secs.376(2)(n), 323 and 342 of the IPC on the basis of the FI statement given by the lady defacto complainant on 11.06.2019 in respect of the alleged incidents which happened for the period from December 2018 upto 08.06.2019 etc.

(2.) The prosecution case in short is that the lady defacto complainant aged 32 years is a native of the State of Manipur and that the petitioner aged 22 years is a native of State of Uttar Pradesh and that both of them were trained as beauticians and working in that capacity in a beauty saloon in Ernakulam and an intense love affair started between them and that the petitioner had assured her that he would marry her and both of them later started residing in Chennai for 1 year and 5 months about 2 years back and later, both of them had come down to Ernakulam in December, 2018 and on the assurance that the petitioner would marry her, he had taken her to a lodge room at Ernakulam and then had forcible sexual intercourse with her. Later, she was made to stay in a rented house along with him and he never permitted her to go out of the house and had frequent sexual relationships with her and later, he abandoned the marriage proposal and thereby, he had committed the abovesaid offences. The petitioner has been arrested in this case on 17.10.2019 and after his remand, has been under custody since then.

(3.) The counsel for the petitioner would point out that the abovesaid case has been registered out of misunderstandings and that the petitioner had married the 2nd respondent lady defacto complainant subsequently, even before he was remanded. Even though the 2 nd respondent had apprised the said about the factum of marriage, the said court denied the bail etc. Sri.Abu Mathew, learned counsel for the 2 nd respondent would submit that the parties are now married and that the 2 nd respondent has filed Annexure-A3 affidavit dated 24.10.2019 that the entire disputes have been settled between them and that the 2 nd respondent is not interested to continue the impugned criminal proceedings against the petitioner any longer and that the petitioner may be released on regular bail as otherwise it would detrimentally affect their marital life etc.