Setback to Ajaz Khan from court, actor did not get anticipatory bail in rape case
Ajaz Khan Bail: Ajaz Khan has got a big setback from a Mumbai court. The court has refused to grant him anticipatory bail in the rape case. Let's know what is the whole matter?

A court in Mumbai has declined to grant anticipatory bail in a rape case for actor Ajaz Khan. Additional Sessions Judge (Dindoshi Court) Datta Dhoble on Thursday declined granting relief to Khan on the ground that 'Given the nature and gravity of the allegations, custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary'.
The prosecution accused Khan, also an actress, of having enticed the victim into a romance. He allegedly exploited his status as a celebrity and TV show host in order to gain the faith of the victim, according to the prosecution.
The FIR states that Khan raped the victim several times "without her consent" on the promise of false pretenses of marriage, financial assistance and promotion.
Khan has been charged with Indian Penal sections of rape and fraudulent relationship. Seeking anticipatory bail, Khan's lawyer said that his client had been falsely accused in the case.
"The informant was well aware that the actor was already married. Both are adults. The relationship between her and the petitioner was consensual," he said.
The defence produced some WhatsApp chats and audio recordings before the court, which allegedly showed that the victim had demanded money to withdraw the case and that the relationship was consensual.
On the other hand, the prosecution argued that custodial interrogation of Khan is necessary. They argued that the bail applicant has a previous criminal record and if he is granted anticipatory bail, he can tamper with the evidence or influence the victim and witnesses.
After hearing both the sides, the court said that Khan's custody is necessary for interrogation, medical examination and collection of evidence. Rejecting the actor's plea, the court said, 'If pre-arrest bail is granted, the risk of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses cannot be ruled out.'