IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.19703 of 2008 RAJEEV KUMAR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3. 3.7.2008 Heard. The petitioner is an accused in a case under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegation is that he and his four companions picked up the girl, gagged her, took her into a secluded room and after closing doors and windows committed rape repeatedly one by one and on several occasions so long as the lady was within her consciousness. The family members of the young girl picked her up in an unconscious state and took her to Bidupur Primary Health Centre where she regained consciousness and gave her statement. The girl stated that her wearing under-garments were having blood-stain and patch of semen which is indicated by the case diary also wherein it has been stated that the garment had marks of blood-stain and patch of semen and the same was seized. The very thrust of the defence argument on the present prayer is that doctor or the Board of doctors who examined the girl do not find any injury on the private part of the girl. Argument was also framed on the examination report of the petitioner by a doctor who reported that petitioner had not committed sexual intercourse recently. The plea of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the case was foisted by the young girl on being instigated by the local Mukhiya who was not pleasantly disposed toward the petitioner and other accused persons or their families. I could not see any reason as - 2 - to why the Mukhiya would trap the petitioner and other accused. The girl could not be unchaste as could be indicated by the reports of the doctor which are on record. The offence of rape could be indicated by the garments of the girl. The Board of doctors could not find any sign of rape or injuries on the person of the girl for reasons best known to them. The report was not prepared in urgency and it could be said from the report which was prepared by Dr. Malti Jha who was medical officer of Sadar Hospital, Hajipur, Vaishali inasmuch as it was prepared on 24.1.2008 whereas the information was lodged on 22.1.2008 for the occurrence taking place on 20.1.2008. One could not be certain about the case for preparing belated medical report, but I could be certain that the case has not been foisted falsely. The petition is dismissed. sudip ( Dharnidhar Jha, J )