The Supreme Court on Thursday granted interim protection from arrest to a Muslim doctor accused of raping a Hindu woman on the pretext of marriage [Dr Abdul Qadir vs State of Uttar Pradesh and anr]..A vacation bench of Justices Aniruddha Bose and Rajesh Bindal sought the response of the Uttar Pradesh government in the matter and directed that the accused should not enter Muradabad (where the case has been filed), till the next date of hearing. The accused, Dr Abdul Qadir, has been accused of establishing sexual relations with a Hindu woman under the pretext of marriage.The counsel for the complainant-woman, advocate Purnima Jauhari, today opposed the plea for interim relief and alleged that this was a case of "love jihad". "The man is a crorepati and I am a victim here. This is a case of love jihad. In a pretext of marriage, he established sexual relations with her. My life is in danger, who will protect me," Jauhari asked. The Court after hearing counsel for the petitioner-doctor proceeded to grant interim protection to the accused. "We grant interim protection from arrest to the petitioner in the case registered in Muradabad until next date of hearing. The petitioner shall not enter Muradabad till the next date of hearing and shall not enter into any communication directly or indirectly with the complainant. Issue notice. Returnable in 4 weeks.".The appellant-doctor moved the top court challenging a May 10 Allahabad High Court order denying him anticipatory bail.The petition, filed through advocate G Indira, stated that a lawyer of the complainant is the mastermind of the conspiracy against him and had earlier extorted ₹1.65 lakh to release him from illegal detention by the police."Shri. Naveneet Saxena’s endeavour since beginning is to give a nomenclature to the relationship of the petitioner herein and the complainant a political and religious color. When admittedly the petitioner herein who is a Muslim man and the complainant is a Hindu women were even ready for continuing the relationship for ever, without having any evidence otherwise has lodged the said FIR case against the petitioner herein." The plea claimed the parties were in a consensual live-in relationship since 2019, even as the marital status of the man, who already has a wife and daughter, was known to their friends.Further, once the relationship turned sour, the woman attempted to portray that the accused had posed as a Hindu man and began blackmailing him to get ₹1 crore.."The Complainant/Informant/Prosecutrix has succumbed to an intentional fallacy/ she is trying to destroy a man with whom she was in a live-in relationship apparently appeared to be in a deep love, but actually with the presumed intention to extort money," the plea stated. The High Court and Sessions Court erred in not considering such facts and circumstances, it was stressed. The allegations of rape were false and not made out, it was contended.