Allahabad High Court

SADDAM HUSAIN AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 6 May 2026
Bench: JAI PRAKASH TIWARI

Holding

The court held that because the FIR contains specific, serious allegations of rape that are prima facie supported by the investigation, anticipatory bail under Section 482 CrPC cannot be granted.

Summary

The applicants, Saddam Husain and another, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the CrPC in a rape case (Crime No. 179 of 2025). They claimed innocence, alleging that the victim's statement under Section 180 CrPC showed no abduction or rape and that there was no credible evidence against them. The State, through the A.G.A., countered that the victim’s statement under Section 183 CrPC indicated the applicants had given her an intoxicating drink and raped her, and that the FIR and investigation records supported the prosecution. The Court examined the material on record and found the allegations specific, serious, and prima facie supported. Consequently, the Court declined to grant anticipatory bail, stating that the applicants could seek other remedies if aggrieved, without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail under Section 482 CrPC should be granted when the FIR contains specific and serious allegations of rape.
Whether the material on record establishes a prima facie case against the applicants.
Whether the applicants' apprehension of arrest justifies the grant of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 180, 183, 482
Indian Penal Code — s. 115(2), 324(4), 351(3), 61(2), 64, 70(1), 87

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Section 482 CrPC
rape
prima facie case
Criminal Procedure Code
Indian Penal Code
bail jurisprudence

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 3536 of 2026

Saddam Husain And Another
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shamim Ahmad Ansari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

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
NABAIL No. 3536 of 2026
2

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.

(Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.)
May 7, 2026
KK Patel

Digitally signed by :-
KRISHN KANT PATEL
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…