Obtaining consent under false pretenses constitutes an offense, and the gravity of the allegations and the petitioner's unscrupulous conduct influenced the court's decision.

S.P. Garg, J.

1. The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in case FIR No.0848/2015 registered under Sections 376/494/495/506 IPC at PS K.M. Pur. Status report is on record. Bail is opposed by the learned counsel for the complainant.

2. FIR in this case has been registered on the basis of written complaint given by the complainant ‘X’ (assumed name) on 15.07.2015. As per the complaint, ‘X’ came in contact with the petitioner, an under-training IRS Officer, through a family friend S.P. Singh, to guide her in the preparation for civil services in February, 2014 at Delhi. They remained in touch on facebook and mobile internet thereafter. When the petitioner proposed her for marriage on whatsapp, she told him to contact her parents. On 15.03.2014, the petitioner came to meet her parents and a meeting took place at the residence of one Ashok Kapoor, 915 Nehru Road, Arjun Nagar. Ashok Kapoor advised them to wait for marriage and let the petitioner complete his training. The petitioner declined to inform his parents about it on the pretext that his brother was going to get marry against their wishes. The petitioner assured X’s parents that he would marry her. In April, 2014 at the petitioner’s instance, she went to Nagpur and stayed at Radisson Blue. There the petitioner sexually harassed her after administering an intoxicating substance in her drink. In June 2014, the petitioner after getting Extra Ordinary leave from the Academy came to Delhi for six months to prepare for exam again and stayed with them at their house from 15.06.2014 to 25.06.2014. Physical relations were established by him with her. ‘X’ further informed that the petitioner forced her to stay with him in a hostel at Rajinder Nagar but was not so permitted by her parents. The petitioner assured her parents and well-wishers by giving a written undertaking that he would marry her. On that assurance, he took her to Rajinder Nagar where they stayed in live-in-relationship from 25.06.2014. She further stated that during this period she conceived once but the pregnancy was got aborted by administering some contraceptive pills by the petitioner. Subsequently, they solemnized marriage at Arya Samaj Vivah Mandir, M.P. Enclave, Ghaziabad, U.P. on 08.09.2014. The petitioner thereafter started subjecting her with mental and physical cruelty; she was criminally intimidated and assaulted. The petitioner used to threaten to kill her and her family members. On 09.07.2015, the petitioner confessed that he was already married and had a six year old daughter.

3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner urged that a false motivated complaint has been lodged by ‘X’ to blackmail the petitioner to extract money. She was a consenting party throughout and had lived with the petitioner with her free consent in her house. It was vehemently urged that ingredients of Section 376 IPC are not attracted as the petitioner herself has claimed that the marriage took place between the two on 08.09.2014. At the most, the case falls within the purview of Sections 494 and 495 IPC which are bailable in nature. The petitioner has joined the investigation and his custodial interrogation is not at all required. It is further urged that the prosecutrix and her family members were aware about the marital status of the petitioner. In a chat conversation on facebook on 28.08.2014, ‘X’ had addressed his daughter as ‘Tashu’. On 30.03.2015, she made extortionate demands and extended various threats. In her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Lata has completely exonerated the petitioner to have any objectionable relations with her. Reliance has been placed on ‘Sajal Gupta vs. State of NCT of Delhi’, Bail Appln.1467/2007, ‘Nirmal Vaid vs. State of NCT of Delhi’, Bail Appln.1760/2012, ‘Arif Iqbal @ Imran vs. State’, (2009) 164 DLT 157, ‘Jagdish Nautiyal vs. State’, 2012 AD (Delhi) 475 & ‘Rohit Chauhan vs. State (NCT of Delhi)’, Bail Appln.311/2013.

4. Learned Addl. Public Prosecutor assist