It can help to write out $F=ma$, and substitute that in:
$$P=m\vec a \cdot \vec v$$
Where the $\cdot$ is the dot product in the power equation above.
As $P$ and $m$ are constants in this scenario, this shows there is a relationships between $\vec a$ and $\vec v$. The value of one constrains the other.
If I may take this out of vector land, let's handle it in 1 dimension. This means the dot product simplifies into staight forward multiplication.
$$P=mav$$
By looking in just one dimension for a moment, we see that this "constant power" constraint implies a relationship between $a$ and $v$. In particular:
$$a=\frac{P}{mv}$$
What I believe is giving you trouble is the
Because as force increases, acceleration of the body must increase and hence it's instantaneous velocity also must increase?
Now this intuition would serve you well if the constant power was slowing the object down. It would be easy to see that, as the object slows, the force increases, increasing the acceleration, further decreasing the velocity. That should feel natural and without contradiction.
That same logic does work in the case where the object is being accelerated by the constant power. However, we have to remember that in that situation, the force is decreasing over time, not increasing. As such, while we can talk about "as the force increases," we have to remember that the direction time must travel to talk that way is backwards. As such, any intuition about how the acceleration and velocity of the object interact is backwards as well. So the logic you have holds, it just leads to confusion because we're approaching the scenario backwards while your intuition is trying to approach it forwards.
If you work out all the equations with that logic and math, the result is consistent. However, if at any point you fall back on your intuition, there's a strong likelihood that your intuition will try to make sense of the situation forwards, and the confusion will billow forth.