5. Per contra , learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submits that at the initiation of the offences by the applicant herein, the victim was 14 years old and her father was blind. The applicant used to come to the house in connection with medication of her father. In the year, 2013 first time he has forcibly committed rape on her and video and photograph were also record of the aforesaid forcible rape incident and subsequent thereto, the applicant continued to have the forcible physical relationship under the threat to make the said video and photo viral on the social media. Since, the victim was of tender age she could not resist the threat perceptions created by the applicant herein. It is further alleged that due to the aforesaid alleged forcible rape incidents she became pregnant twice in the year, 2018 and 2023. However, the applicant got her the contraceptive pills and the pregnancy was terminated. Looking at the tender age of the victim and threat perception, the delay in lodging the complaint, is inconsequential. Since it was the offence of continuous nature under the threat perception, therefore, the delay in lodging in the complaint case is immaterial and will not affect the prosecution. Therefore, he has prayed for dismissal of the instant application filed by the applicant herein. With regard to the case of the sister of the victim is concerned the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submits that the case of her sister was entirely different where there was a consensual relationship between the parties and they were willing to marry each other and when some dispute arose, proceedings were lodged and were settled between the parties.
