IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.34258 of 2009 ASHOK YADAV @ KARI YADAV, S/o late Ramautar Yadav, R/o Vill. – Chhotaki Rajwa, P.S. – Hasanpur, Distt. – Samastipur ……. ……………………………………………………… Petitioner. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR …………………..… Opposite Party. --------------- For the Petitioner:- Mr. Rishit Deo Kr. Singh, Advocate. For the State:- Mr. R.P.S. Singh, A.P.P. --------------- 3. 24.11.2009. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State. Petitioner is an accused in a case registered under Sections 456, 376, 341, 323, 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(X) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Atrocities of Prevention) Act. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case due to the dispute with regard the dues accrued on account of purchase of some grocery articles on credit by the informant for performing Shradha of her husband from the shop of the petitioner amounting to Rs. 30,000/-. When the money was demanded back, a false case has been instituted against the petitioner. It is also submitted that it would be manifest from the first information report itself that the informant had herself stated that the petitioner had developed friendship - 2 - with her and had taken Rs. 25,000/- from her, which he was not returning. Thus, it appears that a false case has been instituted on that score. Petitioner is stated to be in jail since 09.04.2009. It is also submitted that the Medical Board could not come to a definite conclusion that rape had been committed upon the victim. Learned counsel for the State submitted that Annexure-2 shows that there has been simple bruise and swelling all along the body of the informant. There is direct allegation by the prosecutrix upon the petitioner of committing rape. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that there is allegation of rape upon the victim by the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. This application is dismissed. However, if the petitioner is so advised, he may renew his prayer for bail after completion of one year in custody since the date of surrender. dk ( Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J. )