Submission made by learned counsel for the appellant is that the victim herself is a student of B.com 2nd year aged about 21 years. From her 164 Cr.P.C. statement, it is explicitly clear that the appellant and the victim are in relationship and on the false pretext of marrying her, they have developed certain amount of intimacy. This relationship has crossed all limits of decency and decorum when she started dancing on the tune of the appellant and went to nearby kasba Sahjanwa where the appellant hired a room in hotel and thereafter established relationship with her without any resistance. On the call given by the applicant, she is going to Sahjanwa, spending time with her boyfriend, crossing all the limits, just on the fake promise. She is major girl, pursuing her studies in B.Com(IInd). This by itself is indicative of the fact that she was in consensual relationship with the appellant. So far as pregnancy part is concerned, her medical evidence indicates that she was carrying bulky uterus. Except this, there is no other indication that she was undergone pregnancy. On a conjoint reading of 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. statement, it is clear that on her own sweet will, she has visited the place and spent quality time with the appellant. So far as extension of promise to marry with her is concerned, learned counsel for the appellant has relied upon the two judgments of Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Pramod Suryabhan Pawar v. State of Maharashtra reported in (2019) 3 SCC (Cri) 903 and Dr. Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar Vs. State of Maharashtra and others
