Sandeep Kumar, J.—Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Informant.

2. Initially, the present case has been filed for quashing the F.I.R. and cognizance. During the pendency of the present application, the discharge application has been rejected vide order dated 15.07.2023 which is also under challenge by filing an interlocutory application (I.A. No. 1 of 2023).

3. The prosecution story as alleged by the Informant prosecutrix in her written complaint to the concerned police Station is that she was posted as ANM in Koilwar and she met with the petitioner posted as pharmacist at Bihiya, who later proposed the Prosecutrix in 2016 and further introduced her to his family too and assured to solemnize the marriage soon. It is further alleged that in 2017 Petitioner called the Prosecutrix stating that her mother was ill and when the she reached his house, the Petitioner forcefully established physical relation with the Prosecutrix and again assured the Petitioner for marriage. It is also alleged that the Petitioner made multiple physical relations on the pretext of marriage. It is further alleged that the Petitioner is now reluctant to marry her as she have medical issues of white spots and caste difference.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence and has been falsely implicated in the present case for oblique reasons.

5. It is submitted that the allegations made in the FIR are general in nature and are not specific. Further, no material has come against the petitioner during the course of investigation. Moreover, the prosecution story itself is cryptic without any specific dates & details and nothing but bundle of lies. Nothing has come in the Medical report of the prosecutorix and consequently, no case of alleged rape is made out under the alleged section.

6. It has been submitted that moreover, no witnesses even the mother & sister of the prosecutrix have uttered a single word with respect to the alleged incident of rape. Moreover, the reasons best known the Prosecutrix's father, brothers and bhabis haven't been examined by the Investigating Officer. It would not be out of place to mention that the prosecutrix is a habitual litigant having attained proficiency in lodging false complaints and cases has also filed frivolous complaint against her brother and his wife in the month of Feburary- March, 2019 at Shastri Nagar Police Station to pressurize them to succumb to her illegitimate monetary demands. Further, in July, 2018, the Informant also lodged complaint with the Incharge Medical Officer, Koilwar against a reputed government doctor alleging that he misbehaved and abused her. Further, nothing untoward has come in the medical report of the Informant in the present case and the said medical report does not support the case of the Informant & allegations of rape.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that it is pertinent to mention here that the Petitioner is a government employee presently posted as pharmacist at the Community Health Center, Bihiya, Ara where the Petitioner & the Informant came to know each other as they were from the same sector and department and posted in the same district also. Both of them got acquainted with each other in the meetings of the department and later developed friendship with each other through social media, and consequently, developed love affair / relationship. He submits that it is pertinent to mention here that before starting of the relationship, the Informant once visited the Petitioner's house with her mother to give the invitation card and invite the Petitioner and his family members to her brother's marriage in Patna in the winter of 2016-17 wherein she clicked several photographs at the Petitioner's house with his family.

8. It is also submitted that the allegation of living together in rented premises are false and in the in