IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.5869 of 2010 SUKHDEO YADAV,s/o Late Ramadhin Yadav,R/O/V- Babhangama Tole Sakhua,P.S.-Tribeniganj, District-Supaul .. Petitioner Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR .. Opp.Party ----------- For the Petitioner :Mr.Arun, Advocate For the State :Mr.Kumar Priya Ranjan, Addl.P.P. ----------- 03/ 12-05-2010 Heard the parties. In a criminal prosecution for the offences under Sections 376/511 of the Indian Penal Code, petitioner and co- accused Maheshwari Yadav are specifically named in the complaint petition vide Annexure-1. In the complaint petition there is specific allegation against the petitioner of commission of rape upon the complainant, whereas no such allegation is against co- accused Maheshwari Yadav. On her examination on S.A., she has fully supported the allegation of commission of rape upon her by the petitioner. Co-accused Maheshwari Yadav was not named there by the complainant. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has falsely been implicated due to village politics and further co-accused Maheshwari Yadav has been granted anticipatory bail by a Bench of this Court vide order dated 17-03- 2008 passed in Cr.Misc.No.844 of 2008. Learned counsel for the State has rightly pointed out that the case of the petitioner and co-accused Maheshwari Yadav are distinguishable and so far petitioner is concerned, specific 2 allegation of commission of rape is against him. Be that as it may, in view of the nature of allegation against the petitioner, his prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. The petitioner must surrender in the court below in connection with Complaint Case No.351C/2006 within a period of four weeks from today and seek regular bail, if so advised. AH/ ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)