IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.23586 of 2008 RAJESH KUMAR SAHNI @ RAJESH SAHNI Vrs. THE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR **** /3/ 04.08.2008 Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation in the complaint petition itself is sufficient to show that no offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code is made out. The complainant-informant herself has stated that her physical relationship with this petitioner was consented relationship and she continued relationship in the hope that the marriage will be solemnized. It has also been stated that subsequently at the instance of the complainant-informant a forgery has been committed in the judicial record by substituting offence under Sections 428, 366A and 323 of the Indian Penal Code and, in this regard, a judicial enquiry is going on. 3. Considering the facts, the prayer for anticipatory bail on behalf of the petitioner, Rajesh Kumar Sahni @ Rajesh Sahni, is allowed. He is directed to be released on anticipatory bail, in case of his surrender before the Court concerned within four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each in connection with Mufassil (Lakhaura) P.S. Case N0. 14 of 2006 arising out of Complaint Case No. 2326 of 2005 to the satisfaction of Sri L.B. Singh, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Motihari, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. S.A. ( Mridula Mishra, J. )