1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, APPELLATE SIDE NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 17 OF 2011 ( Vanita d/o Ramesh Sonkusare Vs. State of Mah. & One ) ........................................................................................................................................................................ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court orders or directions Court's or Judge's Order and Registrar's orders ........................................................................................................................................................................ Ms. P. D. Rane Adv for applicant. Shri N. R. Rode APP for non applicant/State. Shri N. S. Khandewale Adv for non applicant 2. CORAM: M. N. GILANI J. DATED: 1st AUGUST, 2011. . This is an application under Section 439 of Criminal Procedure Code for cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted by the learned Sessions Judge to the respondent no.2. On 25.11.10 applicant lodged First Information Report in the police station Bhandara making following allegations against the respondent no.2. The prosecutrix is a student in Prerna College in B.B.A. Pt. II . In the year 2005 she was introduced to respondent no. 2. In the year 2006 they developed intimacy. In the year 2009 respondent no. 2 got some job in Mumbai. In the year 2010 at the time of Diwali he had come to his native place i. e. at Bhandara. 2 During the period 2006 to 2009 the respondent no.2 had established sexual relations with the applicant by promising to marry her after he would get a job. When the applicant confronted him with his promise at the time of Diwali in the year 2010, respondent no.2 informed the applicant that he was not prepared to marry her. The parents of applicant and the respondent no.2 discussed the issue. The parents of respondent no.2 expressed their inability to help the applicant since respondent no.2 was not ready for the marriage. After being betrayed by the respondent no.2 applicant lodged F. I. R., and on the basis of it offence came to be registered under Section 376 of Indian Penal Code. Learned Sessions Judge in his order dated 07.12.2010 observed that: "However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case it would be justified to release the applicant/accused on bail in the event of his arrest, subject to certain terms and conditions, and in view of this Court passes the following order." Respondent no.2 filed reply denying the allegations. It is his case that he has been falsely implicated in this case. Charge sheet has been already submitted and in that also no case is made 3 out against him. According to him, the applicant no.1 was in habit of calling him and harassing him. Because of that he lodged written report on 11.10.2010 at police station Bhandara about the calls made by the applicant. Thereafter the applicant called his father informing him that his son (respondent no.2) was having love affair with her. Therefore, the father of the respondent no.2 lodged report against the applicant which was registered as non cognizable offence (NCR). Few factors relevant to decide this application are thus: i] While the applicant was major, she was introduced to the respondent no.2; ii] From the year 2006 to 2010 they were meeting each other; iii] In the year 2008, respondent no.2 established physical relations with the applicant after promising her that he would marry her; iv] Physical intimacy continued till 2009-2010. Aforesaid circumstances are sufficient to raise the issues like, whether the physical intimacy between both was preceded by the false promise of marriage. The answer to this can be searched only after the evidence is adduced, witnesses are cross-examined. In that light of the matter, no fault can be found with the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant no.2. Therefore, there being no merit in the 4 application, it is liable to be rejected. Application is rejected. JUDGE svk