HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2088 of 2026 Court No. - 66 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Heard Sri Devesh Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ram Raksha Tiwari, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Imran Khan, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent. 2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 132 of 2024, under Sections 376, 498A, 354, 323, 504, 506 IPC & Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Kydganj, District Prayagraj, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail, till the conclusion of trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is devar of the victim who lodged the FIR of the present case and in the FIR she did not make any allegation of rape against the applicant. He next submits, when after lodgement of the FIR police tried to arrest the applicant then applicant filed Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 19179 of 2024 before this Court and on 24.10.2025 division bench of this Court was pleased to disposed of his writ petition with the observation that all the alleged offences are punishable within seven years and therefore, notice may be served to him pursuant to the provisions of Section 41A of Cr.P.C. but after the order dated 24.10.2024 passed by Division Bench of this Court when during investigation statement of victim i.e. bhabhi of the applicant was recorded under section 180 and 183 BNSS then she also started making allegation of rape against the applicant and therefore, applicant again had to knock the door of this Court by way of filing Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 20911 of 2024 and again this time Division Bench of this Court on 3.12.2024 was pleased to indulge into Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Devesh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Ram Raksha Tiwari Rishabh Chaurasiya @ Bhanu @ Manu .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) matter and issued notice to the informant and directed that applicant may not be arrested. 4. He further submitted that during pendency of the writ petition filed by the applicant investigation has been completed and charge sheet has been filed and pursuant to the order dated 3.12.2024 passed by Division Bench of this Court during investigation applicant was not arrested and now chargesheet has been filed and applicant is having apprehension of his arrest. 5. He further submitted that prima facie, the allegation of rape appears to be false and improbable and it appears due to the matrimonial dispute victim also made allegation of rape against the applicant who is younger brother of her husband. He further submits, as during investigation applicant was not arrested and there is no allegation that he did not co-operate with the investigation, therefore, now there is no occasion of his custodial interrogation. 6. He further submitted that therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case applicant should be enlarged on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial. 7. Per contra, learned AGA and learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that from the statements of victim i.e. bhabhi of the applicant recorded under section 180 and 183 BNSS it is apparent that she made serious allegation of rape against the applicant, therefore, applicant should not be released on anticipatory bail. 8. However, they could not dispute the fact that FIR of the present case was lodged by the victim herself but in the FIR she did not make any allegation of rape. 9. They further could not dispute the fact that during investigation pursuant to the orders passed by Division Bench of this Court applicant has not been arrested and now charge sheet has been filed. 10. They further could not dispute the fact that apart from the present case applicant is not having any previous criminal history to his credit. 11. I have heard learned counsel for both the sides and perused the record of the case. NABAIL No. 2088 of 2026 2 12. Applicant is devar of the victim and it appears victim in her both the statements recorded under section 180 and 183 BNSS made allegation of rape against him apart from allegation of torture for dowry but FIR of the present case was lodged by the victim herself and in the FIR she did not make any allegation of rape and therefore, it appears during investigation she developed story of rape. 13. Further, even it reflects during investigation when applicant approached this Court in Crl. Misc. Writ Petition then Division Bench of this Court was pleased to stay his arrest and pursuant to the orders passed by Division Bench of this Court during investigation applicant was not arrested and there is no allegation that he did not co-operate with the investigation. 14. Further now charge sheet in the present matter after investigation has been filed and considering the general practice adopted by now a days by the court concerned the apprehension of arrest raised by applicant cannot be ruled out. Further even it appears, after chargesheet custodial interrogation of applicant is not required. 15. Therefore considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in this case, till conclusion of trial. 16. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. 17. In the event of arrest of the applicant-Rishabh Chaurasiya @ Bhanu @ Manu, involved in the aforesaid case crime number, shall be released on bail till conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Presiding Officer/Court Concerned, with the conditions that:- i. that the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; ii. that the applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the court; iii. that the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; NABAIL No. 2088 of 2026 3 iv. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; v. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; 18. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail granted to the applicant. 19. It is made clear that observations made in granting anticipatory bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. April 20, 2026 Ankita NABAIL No. 2088 of 2026 4 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad