IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.15182 of 2011 Krishna Nandan Rajak Versus The State Of Bihar ---------------------------------- 3 16-08-2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the state. Petitioner is languishing in jail custody since 13.12.2010 in a case registered under Section-376 of the Indian Penal Code. There is specific allegation against this petitioner that he used to exploit sexually four years minor girl of the informant. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that according to prosecution case itself, the informant learnt about alleged occurrence on 02.08.2010 but he lodged the present case on 12.12.2010 and no explanation of the aforesaid delay was given in the written report of the informant. It is also contended by him that the victim was medically examined but the doctor did not find any sign of rape on the victim girl. It is further contended by him that the petitioner is an employee of Electricity Department whereas the informant is an employee of NHPC and the offices of both the aforesaid departments are situated in one premises. It is stated that there was some dispute between the petitioner and informant and when the petitioner disclosed this fact before the informant that he was going to lodge a case against the informant, this 2 false case has been lodged against the petitioner and the aforesaid fact is evident from perusal of Paragraph-10 of the case diary. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as submission of the parties, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, his prayer for bail in connection with Rajeev Nagar P.S. Case No. 165 of 2010 stands rejected. However, learned trial court should expedite the trial of the petitioner and conclude the same as early as possible. AKV/- ( Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J.)