petitioner was not even acquainted with the de facto complainant/2nd respondent at the time when she was a minor and the present complaint is nothing but an attempt to settle other disputes and to raise an illegal demand for money from the petitioner. It is submitted that the facts of the case show that though the marriage has not been solemnised in accordance with law, the petitioner and the de facto complainant/2nd respondent started living together as husband and wife from a time when both the petitioner and the de facto complainant/2nd respondent had attained the age of majority and had attained marriageable age. It is submitted that the relationship if at all between the petitioner and the de facto complainant/2nd respondent was purely consensual and there was no element of rape as alleged. It is submitted that the allegation of rape in the years 2016 and 2017 at a time when the de facto complainant/2nd respondent was a minor has been raised at the first time in the complaint which led to registration of Crime No.1091/2021. Though there were other issues between the petitioner and de facto complainant/2nd respondent, the allegation of rape at the time when the de facto complainant/2nd respondent was minor had never been raised before. It is submitted that if the petitioner is arrested and remanded in the custody on the basis of the allegations raised against him, it would amount to miscarriage of justice, in the light of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.
