In the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., with reference to the incident dated 9.10.2018, the prosecutrix has come up with an allegation of rape, whereas in the FIR in relation to the same incident, the prosecutrix has alleged molestation and outraging her modesty. On a later incompatible note in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the prosecutrix has also spoken about the applicant giving her a mobile phone, the month before and also a promise to marry, which hints strongly at a relationship. The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the stand of the prosecution is inconsistent and shaky from the FIR to the account given in the statements under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., inasmuch as in the self authored FIR, lodged by the prosecutrix, there is no allegation of rape which has, lateron, been introduced with reference to the same incident dated 09.10.2018 in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C and 161 Cr.P.C. It is further pointed out that a case of a breach of promise to marry is also mentioned in the statement under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., that makes the case of rape apparently undependable. It is argued that the prosecution account, given its overall changing stance from a case of molestation to one of rape, is rather shaky and undependable, on the basis of which the applicant cannot be detained pending trial, as learned counsel for the applicant would submit.
