NABAIL/3536/2026 of SADDAM HUSAIN AND ANOTHER Vs STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER on 6 May 2026

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.

Court No. - 70 HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and Rajeev Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State. This anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 179 of 2025 under Sections - 87, 61(2), 64, 70(1), 324(4), 351(3), 115(2) BNS, Police Station - Kaptanganj, District - Basti, during the pendency of trial. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that however, in the FIR it is alleged that applicants committed rape upon the victim but from the statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 BNSS, it is evident that she was neither abducted by the applicants nor they committed rape upon her. It is next contended that no offence, as alleged, has been committed by the applicants. It is also submitted that applicants are having apprehension of arrest by the police any time in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against them. He further submitted that in the event the applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings. Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that the allegations levelled against the applicants are specific and serious in nature. As per the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 BNSS, applicants provided some Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shamim Ahmad Ansari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Saddam Husain And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s)

intoxicating substance to her in tea and in the state of intoxication, they committed rape upon her. They further submitted that the FIR and statements recorded during investigation corroborate the prosecution case. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court finds that the allegations made in the First Information Report are specific in nature and are prima facie supported by the material collected during investigation. Considering the nature and gravity of the accusations, the material available on record, and the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not find any good ground for grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant. In case the applicants have any grievance with regard to the proceedings, they may avail appropriate remedy before the competent forum in accordance with law. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby rejected. It is made clear that any observation made herein is confined only to the adjudication of the present anticipatory bail application and shall not prejudice the learned trial court while forming its independent opinion on the basis of the evidence adduced during trial. May 7, 2026 KK Patel NABAIL No. 3536 of 2026

(Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.) Digitally signed by :- KRISHN KANT PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad