JITENDRA KUMAR MEENA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the incident is of the year 2005-06 when the prosecutrix was studying in 12th class at Udaipur and she came into contact with the present petitioner. The prosecutrix submitted that she and the present petitioner belonged to the same caste and when she asked the petitioner to marry her, to which he refused, but they continued to live together. As per prosecutrix, the petitioner raped her from 2005-06 to 2017 and in these 11 years, she got pregnant several times, but resorted to choosing to get abortions done. The prosecutrix alleges that she was exploited by the present petitioner, who allegedly had been promising marriage for 12 years.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment rendered by Hon'ble Apex Court in State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Ch.Bhajan Lal & Ors., 1992 Supp.(1) SCC 335. The relevant part of the above mentioned judgment reads as under :-

(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the respondent oppose the petition, but are unable to refute the aforesaid factual matrix.