bare perusal of the MLC dated 22.05.2022. As per the MLC, prosecutrix had sexual intercourse with her boyfriend i.e. the applicant, twice at some hotel. This is contrary to the statement of the prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P.C. recorded on 28.05.2022, wherein she stated that applicant had taken her to the hotel once. Even in the examination-in-chief before the Court, prosecutrix deposed that applicant had taken the prosecutrix to the OYO hotel once in April. It is further mentioned in the MLC that as on 22.05.2022, prosecutrix gave a history of 3-4 months amenorrhea and carried out Urinary Pregnancy Test once in January or February, 2022, simply to check if she was pregnant, but the same was negative and she repeated this in the last week of April, 2022, when it came positive. However, going by the allegations in the FIR and the statement of the prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and deposition during examinationin-chief, the alleged incident of forcible sexual intercourse took place for the first time in March, 2022 and therefore, it is not understood why the prosecutrix conducted the pregnancy test in January or February, 2022. The only conclusion that can be drawn is that prosecutrix levelled false allegations against the applicant.
