Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:90048 Court No. - 86 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 4156 of 2025 Applicant :- Arjun Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Pandey,Jaya Tripathi,Rahul Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Shri J. K. Chaurasia, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 91 of 2025, under Sections 69, 333 of B.N.S., Police Station Shayamdeurwa, District Maharjganj, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on anticipatory bail. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is named in the F.I.R. The allegation made against him is that on the date of occurrence he had committed rape upon the daughter of informant on the false pretext of marriage and when the informant tried to catch him he fled away from the place of occurrence. Learned counsel further submits that though the victim in her statements recorded under Sections 180 & 183 B.N.S. has made allegation of forcible rape against the applicant, but from these statements it is also clear she used to talk with the applicant, therefore, it appears that she was a consenting party. Learned counsel further submits that in her external examination five injures were found on the person of the victim but the same are simple in nature as per the opinion of the doctor. In her internal examination the doctor has not found any sign and symptoms of injury on her private parts and doctor has opined that sexual thrush cannot be ruled out, but the victim refused for FSL Report. Learned counsel further submits that false and frivolous allegations have been made against the applicant with malafide intention and ulterior motive. The applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. It has further been submitted that applicant has no criminal antecedents and that no coercive process has been issued against the applicant so far. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to cooperate during investigation and trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail by contending that the victim in her statements recorded under Sections 180 & 183 Cr.P.C. has made specific allegation of forcible rape against the applicant, therefore, applicant does not deserve any indulgence at this stage. 5. It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration. 6. In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, no case for anticipatory bail is made out. 7. The anticipatory bail application is rejected. Order Date :- 27.5.2025 Mustaqeem. Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad