IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.31715 of 2009 PURSHOTTAM BHAGAT SINGH @ PURSOTTAM BHAGAT @ PURSOTTAM SINGH Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 07.10.2009 Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing for the state. This is the second time, the petitioner has moved for grant of anticipatory bail. His prayer on the earlier occasion was rejected considering his active participation in execution of the crime. It is submitted that now the parties have compromised the dispute. I find that the offence u/S 376 of the Indian Penal Code is not compoundable offence. As such, even this ground is not sufficient for entertaining second anticipatory bail application on behalf of the petitioner. Accordingly, it is rejected. Petitioner is free to move for regular bail which should be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by order of this court. AKV/ (Mridula Mishra, J.)