friendship should not always be branded as a product of mistrust and mischief thereby accusing the male partner of rape. The Court, considering the complaint and other materials is of the view that the entire story unfolded revealed existence of friendship and thereafter, a relationship which was developed under the circumstances narrated and during the initial period, the petitioner was inclined to marry opposite party No.2 to which she agreed later and even a settlement was reached at on 4th February, 2021. Thus, therefore, it may be said that a promise by the petitioner was broken though he had the initial interest and inclination to marry opposite party No.2, who for certain reasons was not ready for it at that point in time. It is alleged that under threat or compulsion, opposite party No.2 agreed for the marriage after she was blackmailed by the petitioner. Interestingly, opposite party No.2 agreed later and even entered into a written agreement with the petitioner in 2021. It indicates that the parties had a difficult time in dealing with each other and managing their relationship which finally worsened leading to separation. From the conduct of both the parties as made to suggest considering the complaint and pleadings, it would not be just and proper to allege sexual mischief against the petitioner, who for reasons unknown declined to marry opposite party No.2. As earlier stated, the parties are educated and well placed and were quite aware of the consequences and still engaged themselves in a relationship which remotely appear to be one sided and having understood the kind of relationship it was developed and had become later on, the Court, keeping in view the settled position of law, which are referred to herein before, reaches at a conclusion that it would not be justified to allege rape against the petitioner, But, in so far as other allegations are concerned, it should be left open for enquiry and investigation.
