IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.38548 of 2010 SHAMBHU RAI Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 03. 20.01.2011 Heard learned senior counsel, Mr. S.N.P.Sinha appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned A.P.P. on behalf of the State. The petitioner, Shambhu Rai is in custody since 19.04.2010 in Sarairanjan P.S.Case No. 10 of 2010 under Section 376 I.P.C. The prayer of this petitioner was earlier rejected by me on 27.05.2010 in Cr. Misc. No.18736 of 2010 and the petitioner was given liberty to renew his prayer for bail on submission of chargesheet. It appears that chargesheet has been submitted under Section 354 I.P.C. and therefore, the petitioner again filed Cr. Misc. No.22747 of 2010 before this Court directly and therefore, by terms of order dated 02.07.2010, the petitioner was directed to move the trial court prior to approach of this Court. Accordingly, the petitioner moved his regular bail application before the Court below which was rejected on the ground that after hearing the parties, cognizance has been taken under Section 376 I.P.C. From perusal of the F.I.R., it appears that the informant, Rekha Devi made direct allegation against this petitioner that he committed rape on her. 2 The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in fact, there was dispute between the parties who are of same village and therefore, this case has been instituted on false allegation. From perusal of the case diary, it appears that the informant in her further statement, in paragraph 6 has clearly supported the case that she has been raped. In spite of the said fact, the police submitted chargesheet under Section 354 I.P.C. However, after hearing the parties, it appears that the Court below has taken cognizance under Section 376 I.P.C. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail. Accordingly, this bail application is rejected. Saurabh (Mungeshwar Sahoo, J.)