ORDER

RAJNISH BHATNAGAR, J.

1. The present bail application has been filed by the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 584/2023 U/s 376/ 328 IPC registered at Police Station Nabi Karim.

2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that a zero FIR No 004/2023 Dated 07.10.23, U/s 376 IPC P.S. Maghwadi, Mumbai, Maharastra was received in PS Nabi Karim vide diary No. 2322 SO/DCP/C and the same was marked to SI Sharanya S for further action. On 23.10.23 the complainant came to police station and identified her English statement which is attached with ZERO FIR.

3. The complainant alleged in her statement that she is a worker of Congress Party from the year 2018. She further alleged that she met petitioner 5-6 years ago through facebook and they become good friend. On 22.09.23, there was a proposer election of Delhi University union. So, for the preparation of the election, she came to Delhi on 30-07-2023.

4. The complainant further alleged that on 02.08.23, petitioner called her and asked her to meet him. On 03.08.23 and 5.08.23, she met petitioner and they took dinner together. On 05.08.23, petitioner proposed her for marriage and she accepted his proposal as she was in love with petitioner. She further alleged that she returned Mumbai on 09.08.23 for attending her cousin marriage. On 14.08.23, she again came to Delhi for university election and this time she stayed at Noida at petitioner's elder brother house. The complainant further alleged that petitioner tried to establish physical relation with her but he could not do that.

5. The complainant further alleged that on 23.09.2023 between 1 to 2 p.m., she went to meet petitioner at Indo-Continental hotel, 8490/91, Aryan Nagar, near Dharmakanta, Arakshan Road, Pahadganj, New Delhi. When they were together, petitioner gave her medicine of fever and juice to drink. After that she felt asleep. In the evening, around 5 to 6 p.m. when she woke up there was a blanket on her body and her clothes were missing and she realized that her friend (petitioner herein) had a sexual intercourse with her without her consent. She asked the explanation to petitioner but he said that they will marry. Petitioner told her that he would come to Mumbai and talk about their marriage with her parents. On 25.09.2023, she returned to Mumbai.

6. The complainant further alleged that after returning to Mumbai, petitioner and she were talking on mobile phone. When she asked petitioner about marriage, petitioner refused to marry with her. She further alleged that on 2.10.2023, petitioner disconnected her and blocked her on social media.

7. During the course of legal action NGO counsellor was informed and medical examination of complainant was got conducted from RML Hospital vide MLC No-E/216339/23 and a case FIR No 584/23, U/s 376 IPC was registered on 23.10.23 and investigation went underway.

8. I have heard the Ld. counsel for the petitioner, Ld. APP for the State, perused the Status Report and also perused the records of this case.

9. It is submitted by the Ld. counsel for the petitioner that the allegations against the petitioner are baseless and the relationship between the petitioner and the victim was consensual and the victim had accompanied the petitioner throughout of her own free will and she had even stayed at the house of the brother of the petitioner. It is further submitted that the alleged call recordings between the petitioner and his wife are neither authenticated nor the contents were made known to the petitioner. It is further submitted by relying on Sanjay Pandey Versus Directorate of Enforcement 2022 LAWPACK (Del) 90331 : 2023(1) AD (Delhi) 53 that the recording calls without consent is a breach of privacy and right to privacy has been enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution which demands that the phone calls not be recorded except with the consent of the individuals concerned. So, therefore, it is argued that no reliance can be placed on that call re