The court emphasized the distinction between consensual relationships and allegations of rape, ruling that mere allegations without evidence of coercion do not suffice for criminal proceedings.

JUDGMENT :

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.

1. The Bail Application under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Surkasha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as 'B.N.S.S.’) read with Section 528 of B.N.S.S. (earlier known as 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘Cr.P.C.’) read with Section 482 Cr.P.C.) has been filed on behalf of the Applicant for grant of Regular Bail in FIR No.526/2024 under Sections 376 /377/506/509/323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’ hereinafter), registered at Police Station Samaypur Badli, Delhi.

2. It is stated in the Application that the Petitioner is in custody since 30.05.2024. It is submitted that the Complainant/Prosecutrix is a highly educated independent woman, aged around 24 years, open-minded and elder to the Applicant. The Applicant and the Complainant dated each other for quite long time and they were in deep love with each other. They had plans to get married and their families were aware about their relationship. Both of them used to travel out of Delhi on trips, including hill stations, Adventure Parks etc. and spent quality time together. They used to enjoy and cherish their time together as a happy couple. The Prosecutrix had expressed her love for the Applicant multiple times over WhatsApp, which shows no coercion or force in their relationship. Even on a few occasions the Prosecutrix insisted to go to OYO Hotels even though Applicant was evasive for the same. During such stays, she voluntarily produced her Identity Card and did not raise any concerns or made any complaint of any alleged misconduct to the police or any other authority, which demonstrates that their physical relationship was with mutual consent, free-will and love.

3. The Applicant has alleged that in May, 2024 he discovered that the Complainant/Prosecutrix was also dating someone else and regularly communicating with that person, which was quite traumatic for him. With an intention to resolve the misunderstanding, he met the Complainant in last week of May, 2024 when she broke all the ties with him. However, out of vendetta she filed the false and fabricated complaint and got the FIR registered against the Complainant. It is asserted that Applicant’s promise of marriage was never false and he never seduced the Complainant to indulge in sexual acts. There is no evidence to suggest any coercion, force or assault on the part of the accused. He never blackmailed her to share her private photographs and has not annexed their photographs with this Petition but has sought liberty to produce the same at the time of arguments.

4. Learned Counsel for the Applicant submitted that investigation is complete and Charge-sheet has already been filed before the learned Trial Court wherein nothing incriminating has been found against the Applicant. Charge has already been framed and proceedings in Trial Court are in progress. The antecedents of Applicant are clean and be belongs to a respectable family of the Society. Prolonged incarceration of the Applicant would cause major financial constraints for his family, as he is the sole bread earner. His father suffers from serious mental medical issues and his younger brother, who has just passed out 12^th Class, is unable to pursue his studies due to lack of money.

5. The Applicant has undertaken not to tamper with the evidence and to no contact the Complainant or witnesses and appear before the Trial Court regularly.

6. Reliance is placed upon decision in Prashant Vs. State of NCT of Delhi, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3375 wherein the Apex Court taking view of the fact that allegations in the FIR and the Charge-sheet, did not contain