IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.13691 of 2008 GOPAL PRASAD Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 2.5.2008 Heard on the bail petition made on behalf of petitioner Gopal Prasad who stands implicated in Complaint Case No. 253 of 2007 for offences registered under Sections 498A, 406, 379, 376 of the Indian Penal Code and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. It has been submitted that so far Section 376 IPC is concerned, the same appears to be not correct as the case has been lodged after a lapse of eight months for which there is no plausible explanation. As a matter of fact, parties have been made to compromise and a reference of Annexure-4 has been made so as to show that complainant Priyanka Kumari has entered into compromise with the petitioner Gopal Prasad and for which a compromise petition duly signed by her and the petitioner seems to have been filed in the court of S.D.J.M., Raxaul at Motihari. It is stated in the compromise petition that such compromise has been settled without any coercion or pressure. Moreover, it is submitted that the allegation of rape has not been corroborated by the complainant herself as the present case has been lodged after eight months of the occurrence. In the facts and circumstances, as also the fact that his daughter has met with serious accident, the petitioner above named is released on bail on execution of bail bond of Rs, 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction - 2 - of S.D.J.M. Raxaul at Motihari in connection with Complaint Case No. 253 of 2007, distinguishing his case from other accused persons. Sanjeet (Subash Chandra Jha, J.)