ABHINESH KASHYAP Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Sec. 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.0033 dtd. 3/4/2021 registered under Ss. 376(2)(n), 313 and 506 of Indian Penal Code at Woman Police Station, Ambala City.

(2.) The complainant leveled allegations against the petitioner that she had taken a loan from Bajaj Finance Limited, Ambala City, for which, she was required to pay installments. She could not pay the same. The petitioner is working as Area Collection Manager with the said Finance Company. On the ground of extending help in the settling the loan, the petitioner developed intimacy with the complainant. In the process, both of them got close. The petitioner started physical relations with the complainant. Although, the petitioner was already a married man, he has disclosed to the complainant that he had already divorced his wife and that he would marry the complainant. The petitioner also arranged a residential accommodation for the complainant at Zirakpur and both of them started residing together. In June, 2020, she came to her parental house. On 6/6/2020, at about 12:30 p.m., the petitioner came to her parental house and again told the complainant that he wanted to marry the complainant. By extending this promise, he again established physical relations with her. On 13/1/2021, the petitioner also took the complainant to Goa and then back to Delhi and repeatedly made promise to marry her and made physical relation with the complainant. Out of the physical relations, the complainant got pregnant twice. As regards first pregnancy, the complainant had to abort due to non-development of foetus whereas, the second pregnancy, she got aborted under the duress of the petitioner on 12/2/2021 at Maatram Health Care Centre, Dera Bassi. On these allegations, the first information report was got registered against the petitioner.

(3.) While raising arguments, counsel for the petitioner has submitted that case against the petitioner is totally concocted. The complainant, herself, is a lady of doubtful antecedent. Since she was not able to repay the loan amount. She had presented to the petitioner that she was in a personal problem. Out of humanity, the petitioner extended help to her. In the process, some money was paid by the petitioner to the complainant. When the petitioner demanded his money back, the complainant has created this false story just to rope in the petitioner in the criminal case. It is further submitted that the complainant is a married lady and is of 37 years of age. Therefore, even if there have been physical relations between the petitioner and the complainant, no criminal liability can be fastened upon the petitioner; being consensual acts. Counsel has further submitted that the allegations leveled by the complainant are inherently inconsistent and improbable. On the one hand, the complainant has stated that the petitioner made physical relations by promising her to marry and on the other hand, she has asserted that the petitioner forcibly made the physical relations with the complainant. Relying upon the whatsapp chat between the complainant and hospital staff, counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the complainant had got the child aborted on her own because she did not want any child at that time. Therefore, the petitioner has no role in the abortion of the child of the complainant as well. Counsel has further submitted that there is no other case against the petitioner. The petitioner shall join the investigation. Hence, the petitioner be granted concession of anticipatory bail.