IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.37256 of 2009 KARU MAHTO SON OF SHRI SURENDRA MAHTO VILL - SOSANDI , P.S. RAHUI , DISTT - NALANDA Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ------- 2 19.11.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner, counsel for the informant and the State. Petitioner is an accused in a case instituted under Sections 376 of Indian Penal Code. He committed rape on the prosecutrix. Allegation is that when she was alone in the house, the petitioner entered into the house and committed rape and thereafter escaped. Learned counsel submits that there is some variation with regard to the place of occurrence as well as time of occurrence in her statement made under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. It is next contended that the medical evidence does not support the prosecution case. Learned counsel further highlighted that there is some delay in lodging the case. Learned counsel for the informant submitted that the prosecutrix was medically examined on next day i.e. on 18.6.2009 and the doctor has opined that the possibility of rape cannot be denied. Impugned order reflects that in course of investigation witnesses who had assembled on hearing the cry/hulla have supported the prosecution case. This court in view of the materials available on record is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail 2 to the petitioner. His prayer is rejected. The application stands dismissed. pkj ( Kishore K. Mandal, J. )