of the present applicant. Though, recovery of such photographs is an incriminating circumstance, there are no allegations that these photographs were circulated or were made public by the present applicant. Moreover, if the applicant was giving threats to the prosecutrix to use these photographs, it was next to impossible for the prosecutrix to keep in touch with the present applicant willingly as is reflected in their messages. The very strong circumstance in favour of the applicant is their exchange of messages during the month of July and August, 2018. The records pertaining to telephone numbers of the applicant and the prosecutrix during that one year period before F.I.R., shows large number of phone calls and messages were exchanged between them. Therefore, at this stage, there is scope to believe that the prosecutrix had willingly kept relationship with the applicant and she was not forced either through the threat of exposure of the photographs or through any other means to continue with the relationship. The exchange of gold and cash is from both sides, therefore, it cannot be directly linked with the threat or extortion at the instance of the present applicant. The statement of the
