show-cause notice issued by the employer regarding her continued acrimonious behaviour against the Appellant- accused, with the ultimatum that should she not respond to the notice with the requisite clarification, she would be relieved of her employment. It is only thereafter that the subject FIR was lodged. Further, the same was lodged four months after the alleged incident of forced sexual intercourse with the complainant. If the description of the offence is taken at face value, right at the first instance, the complainant was not willing and was persuaded to engage in relations on the assurance of eventual marriage between the parties. When she enquired as to when the same would take place, a few days later, allegedly the Appellantaccused refused and asked her to marry someone else. That would be the first occasion when, having realized that she had been taken advantage of the complainant should have taken the requisite action. Even if that was not done so, the fact that the subject FIR was only lodged after the issuance of show-cause notice, which obviously has large real-world implications insofar as the complainant is concerned, leaves open a gaping possibility that the same was lodged as an afterthought and was a vehicle for vengeance for the impending consequences described above. 14. One of the factors mentioned in Bhajan Lal ( supra ) justifying the quashing of criminal proceedings is when the same is initiated in pursuance of ulterior motives. It reads as under:
