Point of law: A woman’s body is not a man’s plaything and he cannot take advantage of it in order to satisfy his lust and desires by fooling a woman into consenting to sexual intercourse simply because he wants to indulge in it. The accused in this case has committed the vile act of rape and deserves to be suitably punished for it

ORDER :

1. Heard Mr. P.P. Majmudar, learned advocate for the applicant, Ms. Moxa Thakkar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State and Mr. R.N. Singh, learned advocate for the original complainant at length through Video Conferencing.

2. The present application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with an FIR being C.R. No. 11196037200856 of 2020 registered with Lakshmipura Police Station, District Vadodara City for the offences punishable under Sections 366, 376(2)(n) and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Learned advocate appearing for the applicant has vehemently submitted that the offence is alleged to have been committed during the period between 2014 to 2019 on different locations and the complaint has been lodged on 12.11.2020. He has also submitted that there is a huge delay in registering the FIR for which no sufficient explanation has been offered by the original complainant. He has also submitted that as per the FIR the original complainant had knowledge regarding the marriage of the applicant and she denied to marry him. He has also submitted that a alleged by the complainant that the applicant had allured her by promising that the applicant will take divorce from his wife. While reading the FIR, he has submitted that it clearly appears that the ingredients of the alleged offence is missing and there is possibility of consensual relations. He has further submitted that the case of the prosecution is not probable to be true and the same is concocted one. He has also submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated by the complainant just to harass and extort money from the applicant. He has submitted that the original complainant is an educated lady and major. He has relied on the decision rendered by the Apex Court in Criminal Appeal No. 1165 of 2019 in case of Pramod Suryabhan Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra and Another dated 21.8.2019. He has also referred to the various text messages. He has further submitted that the applicant will be available during the trial and will not run away from the justice and will not interfere in the investigation. He has further submitted that this application for bail may kindly be considered and the applicant may be released on bail on stringent conditions.

4. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has vehemently opposed grant of regular bail on the grounds that the allegations made in the FIR is serious in nature and the involvement of the present applicant is from very beginning. She has also contended that the applicant has allured the complainant by giving false promise to marry and that the applicant will take divorce from his wife. She has submitted that prima-facie it is a case of rape and the investigation is at crucial stage. She has prayed to dismiss the present application.

5. Mr. R.N. Singh, learned advocate for the original complainant has also supported the arguments of the learned APP and has stated that the original complainant has already filed affidavit in this matter where she has clearly stated that the applicant accused has been exploiting me since March, 2014 he has also submitted that by using his position in the Company and harass her. He has contended that the complainant was threatened by the applicant of making Photographs viral. He has also contended that the complainant has submitted a complaint to the Committee constituted by the Company under Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013 wherein also the applicant was able to delay the process as he had influence in the Company. He has also submitted that in that complaint she her taken limited point but in FIR she has narrated everything which had happened with her in the past. He has submitted that there is likelihood of the applicant tampering the evidence. He has submitted that the Whatsapp messages are tampered one. He has also submitted th