Dismissed¶16

Yashraaj @ Yashpal Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC2 Apr 2026NABAIL/2450/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court (Jai Prakash Tiwari, J.), 06.05.2026, NABAIL No. 2450 of 2026 — Yashraaj @ Yashpal Singh v. State of U.P. — anticipatory bail under S. 482 BNSS in Case Crime No. 272 of 2025, Ss. 376/406 IPC, PS Civil Lines, Meerut — rejected; FIR allegations specific; delay and medical-evidence arguments raised by defence; precedents referred/relied on: Nitin B. Nikhare (SLP (Crl.) 1889/2024), Sushila Aggarwal (2020) 5 SCC 1, Srikant Upadhyay 2023 SCC OnLine 9425.

What did the court decide?

Bare perusal of the first information report shows that the allegations are specific against the applicant; if the applicant has any grievance he may avail remedy before the appropriate forum, and no good ground is made out for anticipatory bail. ¶15

Yashraaj @ Yashpal Singh vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2026)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2450 of 2026

¶3

Yashraaj @ Yashpal Singh		.....Applicant(s)
	Versus
State Of U.P. And 2 Others		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)		: Hemant Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)		: G.A.

¶4

Court No. - 70

¶5

HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶7

This anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 272 of 2025 under Sections - 376, 406 IPC, Police Station - Civil Lines, District - Meerut, during the pendency of trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. No offence has been committed by the applicant. It is further submitted that alleged incident is said to have been taken place on 14.05.2023 and complaint of the present case was filed on 15.10.2025 i.e. highly belated and there is no plausible explanation in this regard. It is also submitted that there are contradictions in the FIR and in the statements of the victim recorded during investigation. It is also submitted that in the medical examination, no injury was found on the body of the victim. It is further submitted that the applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. In support of his arguments, learned counsel for the applicant placed reliance upon the judgment of the Apex Court in case of Nitin B. Nikhare vs. The State of Maharashtra arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 1889 of 2024 decided on 21 January, 2025. In case the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, there is no possibility of misusing the liberty of anticipatory bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has contended that the specific levelled against the applicant in the FIR. He further submitted that applicant is a public servant and he has committed rape

¶10

NABAIL No. 2450 of 2026

¶11

¶12

upon the victim under the pretext of getting her jot in the Army and Police and also duped money from her. He further submitted that statements recorded during investigation also corroborate the prosecution case.

¶13

In Sushila Aggarwal and others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that while considering an application for grant of anticipatory bail, the court has to consider the nature of the offence, the role of the person, the likelihood of his influencing the course of investigation, or tampering with evidence including intimidating witnesses, likelihood of fleeing justice, such as leaving the country, etc. It has further been held that Courts ought to be generally guided by considerations such as the nature and gravity of the offences, the role attributed to the applicant, and the facts of the case, while considering whether to grant anticipatory bail, or refuse it. Whether to grant or not is a matter of discretion.

¶14

In Srikant Upadhyay Vs.State of Bihar, 2023 SCC OnLine 9425, the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that the power to grant anticipatory bail is an extraordinary power. Though in many cases, it was held that bail is said to be a rule, it cannot, by any stretch of imagination, be said that anticipatory bail is the rule. It cannot be the rule and the question of its grant should be left to the cautious and judicious discretion by the court depending on the facts and circumstances of each case

¶15

Insofar as the allegations are concerned, the same is very much apparent on record. In this case, bare perusal of the first information report itself shows that the allegations are specific against the applicant. In case the applicant has any grievance, he may avail remedy before the appropriate forum. No good ground is made out for anticipatory bail.

¶16

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, without expressing any opinion on merit, the instant anticipatory bail application is rejected .

¶17

It is made clear that observation made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case.

¶18

(Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.)

¶19

May 6, 2026 KK Patel

¶20

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

Yashraaj @ Yashpal Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yashraaj @ Yashpal Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

X(Minor) Vs State of U.P. and Another

Amit Singh vs State of U.P.

Juvenile X Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ajay Kumar and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Juvenile X vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shah Alam vs State of U.P. and Another