NABAIL/2685/2026 of DR RAJ ROOP Vs STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS 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. Rejoinder affidavit filed on behalf of applicant is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant 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. 421 of 2024 under Sections - 69 BNS, Police Station -Ghoorpur, District - Prayagraj, during the pendency of trial. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that from the statements recorded during the course of investigation, it is evident that the physical relationship established between the applicant and the victim was consensual in nature and mere failure to solemnize marriage at a later stage, would not attract criminal liability. Learned counsel further submitted that against the summoning order passed against the applicant, he has preferred an Application U/s 528 B.N.S.S. No. 9484 of 2026, which is still pending before the Court. It is contended that no offence, as alleged, has been committed by the applicant. It is also submitted that in the event the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate in the trial proceedings. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sharda Prasad Mishra, Subhash Chandra Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Abhijeet Mukherji, G.A. Dr Raj Roop .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s)

Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that the allegations levelled against the applicant are specific and serious in nature. As per the version of the prosecutrix, the applicant forcibly committed rape upon her. It is further submitted that the applicant is continuously threatening the informant and her family members to withdraw the case and is exerting pressure upon them to turn hostile.They further submitted that the statements recorded during investigation corroborate the prosecution case. It is also pointed out that after due investigation, the charge-sheet has already been submitted against the applicant. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record, this Court finds that the allegations made in the First Information Report are specific and prima facie supported by the material collected during investigation. The charge-sheet has already been filed against the applicant after due 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 applicant has any grievance with regard to the proceedings, he may avail appropriate remedy. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby rejected. It is made clear that observations made in the instant anticipatory bail shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. May 7, 2026 KK Patel NABAIL No. 2685 of 2026

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