IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Cr.Misc. No.13809 of 2011
Rakesh Singh
Versus
The State Of Bihar
-----------
2 30.06.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well
as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the state.
The petitioner is said to be rapist of a minor girl,
aged about 9-10 years.
The contention of learned counsel for the
petitioner is that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in
this case by the informant and as a matter of fact, no such
occurrence did ever take place. It is contended by him that
the fardbeyan of the informant was recorded on 29.10.2010
whereas, the occurrence is said to be taken place on
25.10.2010 and no explanation of the aforesaid delay, has
been given. It is further contended by him that several co-
villagers submitted a written report before the DIG, Saran
Range, Chapra disclosing the real fact and furthermore,
when the victim girl was medically examined on 02.11.2010,
no sign of intercourse was found on her person and
furthermore, the prosecution has not given explanation for
delay in examination of the victim girl.
Although learned counsel for the petitioner tried
to convince me about the innocence of the petitioner but I
am not, at all, convinced with his submission. Admittedly, the
2
victim girl has narrated the entire episode in her statement
recorded under section-164 of the Cr.P.C. Therefore,
considering the nature of alleged offence as well as
submission of the parties, the prayer for bail of the petitioner
in connection with Garkha P.S. Case No. 237 of 2010
pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saran at
Chapra stands rejected at least, at this stage.
AKV/- ( Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J.)