A man accused of raping a woman on false pretext of marriage, has been granted interim protection from arrest by the apex court
On August 6, 2021, Singh's marriage was fixed by his parents. When the complainant came to know about this, she allegedly started blackmailing, asking him to marry her and warned that she would lodge a rape case against him, the appeal said. Later, the complainant lodged a case against Singh in October at Jaipur.
A man accused of raping a woman on false pretext of marriage, has been granted interim protection from arrest by the apex court
A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Bela M Trivedi issued notice to the Rajasthan government and others on the appeal filed by the man against the high court order. “Issue notice, returnable within three weeks. Subject to the petitioner joining investigation and cooperating with the authorities, the petitioner would not be arrested until the next date of hearing,” the bench said in its December 6 order.
The apex court, however, granted liberty to the police to move an application for vacation of this interim order.
Advocate Namit Saxena, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that the allegation of rape against his client was baseless. Saxena stated that frivolous allegations have been levelled against his client because he refused to marry the woman.
The top court was hearing an appeal filed by Mukesh Kumar Singh, working on the post of Technician Grade 1 at Jaipur, against the order passed by Rajasthan high court which dismissed his anticipatory bail plea.
According to the appeal, Singh met the woman for the first time about 10 years ago when they came in contact with each other on account of work. In due course, Singh and the complainant remained in touch through messages and calls and also used to meet regularly, the appeal said.
“The FIR is based on flimsy grounds alleging rape committed upon the complainant after 10 years of relationship with the petitioner. The FIR has admitted the said fact of romantic affair and has been filed with the sole intention to harass the petitioner as he chose to not marry the complainant,” the appeal said.
(With PTI Inputs)