marriage soon. Even if it is assumed that the applicant and the prosecutrix had physical relation, then the relationship was consensual, the prosecutrix herself is major lady and capable of giving the consent. Consequent to these developments of things, a dispute arose between both the families, because of which father of the applicant was compelled to file a complaint (Annexure-A/2) followed by lodging of FIR on 15-04-2017. It was then after due deliberation and concoction a false FIR was lodged against the applicant on 15-06-2017 by the prosecutrix against the applicant. It is submitted that because of pressure tactics applied by the prosecutrix side the applicant has lost his mental balance and is undergoing treatment. The documents of prescription of psychiatrist are annexed in record. It is submitted that the applicant is victimized in the case and no case is made out against him. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance in the order passed by the Bombay High Court in the matter of Mahesh Balkrishna Dandane Versus State of Maharashtra , reported in 2014 4 Crimes (HC) 37 and the judgment passed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the matter of Deepak Gulati Versus State of Haryana , reported in (2013) 7 SCC 675, wherein it has been clearly held that physical relationship on the basis of promise to marriage does not amount to rape. Hence, it is prayed that the applicant may be benefited with grant of anticipatory bail.
