New Delhi, Nov 6 (IANS): The Delhi High Court has granted anticipatory bail to a 20-year-old college student accused of raping his professor.

Justice Saurabh Banerjee noted that the complainant, referred to as the "prosecutrix," had willingly entered into a relationship with the accused and continued it for over a year.

The judge noted that her actions appeared to be driven by love, care, and affection for the accused, rather than compulsion or force.

The prosecutrix alleged that she had married the accused in a temple based on his promise of a legal marriage in the future. Subsequently, he allegedly persuaded her to undergo an abortion and left after taking a substantial sum of money from her.

Senior Advocate Pramod Dubey, representing the accused, argued that the FIR was registered with the intent to harass him.

He pointed out that the accused had cooperated with the investigation and had not threatened or harmed the prosecutrix.

The State's Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail, citing the heinous nature of the alleged offenses and the initiation of Section 82 Cr.P.C. proceedings against the accused.

The trial court had previously rejected the applicant's anticipatory bail application, mentioning threats made by the accused at a police station. In its decision, Justice Banerjee acknowledged the gravity of Section 376 IPC offences but stressed the importance of considering the specific facts, circumstances, and background of the case.

The prosecutrix, a 35-year-old adult undergoing divorce, had a "guru-shishya" relationship with the accused and was aware of the consequences of their relationship, given the age difference.

The court found no merit in the State's argument regarding Section 82 Cr.P.C. proceedings, as the accused had not been declared a proclaimed "offender" but was merely a proclaimed "person" evading arrest.

Regarding the alleged threats, the court noted that the prosecutrix had visited the accused's relatives with the investigating officer after filing the FIR and had not filed any complaint when he allegedly threatened her at the police station.

In conclusion, the court considered the accused's clean antecedents and his cooperation with the investigation, leading to the grant of anticipatory bail by the trial court, where he had joined the investigation on fourteen occasions.