IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.4984 of 2010 ASHOK KUMAR RAI @ ASHOK KUMAR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 06/ 21.07.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in Manhar P.S. Case no. 230 of 2004 registered under sections 420, 313 and 376/34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is not named in the FIR. It is further submitted that initially a case was lodged against the husband of the present informant vide annexure 3 for torture and for abducting the sister of the present informant. Subsequently in September, 2004, 164 Cr. P.C statement of the present informant was recorded in earlier case lodged by the father of the informant in which she levelled allegation against her husband. It is also submitted that other sister has also levelled allegation against the husband of the present informant. It is lastly submitted that compromise has been filed and in the compromise it has been specifically stated that in order to put pressure against the father and other persons the present case has been lodged as retaliatory measure. It is submitted by learned counsel for the State that the statement recorded in paragraphs 6 and 7 of the case diary informant has alleged that petitioner also established forceful physical relationship. Considering the fact that FIR has been lodged in 2004 and - 2 - there is allegation levelled by the informant against the petitioner of having forceful physical relationship, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The anticipatory bail application of the petitioner is dismissed. shahid (Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)