AP High Court Declines Anticipatory Bail To Cop Booked In Rape FIR Citing 'Strong Likelihood' Of Influencing Victim

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has refused anticipatory bail to a Circle Inspector of Police accused in a rape case observing that there was a strong likelihood of the accused interfering with the investigation and influencing the victim.Section 64(1) BNS provides punishment for the offence of rape with rigorous imprisonment of not less than ten years, which may extend to imprisonment for life, along with fine.Justice Balaji Medamalli observed that the circumstances of the case raised a genuine apprehension of interference with the investigation and influencing of the victim. The Court said:“Considering the material on record and the position held by the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that there exists a strong likelihood of the petitioner interfering with the investigation and influencing or prevailing upon the defacto complainant/victim. Having regard to the gravity of the allegations leveled against the petitioner, this Court is of the considered view that it is not a fit case for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.”The case pertained to a Criminal Petition filed seeking anticipatory bail. The petitioner, a Circle Inspector of Police, was accused of committing rape upon the de facto complainant.According to the prosecution, the complainant and her family had known the petitioner for nearly ten years. It was alleged that the petitioner had established a Police Coaching Centre where the complainant used to prepare food for students. Subsequently, the petitioner allegedly set up a poultry farm and began residing in a separate room in the complainant's rented premises while paying for accommodation and meals. The prosecution further alleged that on 29.04.2026, when the complainant was alone at her residence, the petitioner entered the room and forcibly committed rape despite her resistance.Seeking anticipatory bail, the petitioner contended that he was innocent and that the complaint was false and motivated to defame him professionally and personally. It was further argued that he was willing to cooperate with the investigation and that statements under Section 164 Cr.P.C. had already been recorded.Opposing the plea, the prosecution submitted that the petitioner was an Inspector of Police and there was every possibility of his interfering with the investigation. The prosecution also relied upon material in the case diary allegedly showing that the petitioner's son had threatened the complainant by warning her of cases relating to defamation, cheating and honey trapping.Agreeing with the prosecution, the High Court observed that the allegations were grave in nature and that the material on record indicated a likelihood of the petitioner influencing the victim and interfering with the investigation. Holding that it was not a fit case for grant of pre-arrest bail, the Court dismissed the Criminal Petition.Case Title: B China Mallaiah v. State of Andhra PradeshCase Number: Criminal Petition No. 4075/2026Counsel for Petitioner: Challa Ajay KumarCounsel for Respondent: V V Lakshmi Narayana, Public ProsecutorClick Here To Read/Download Order

AP High Court Declines Anticipatory Bail To Cop Booked In Rape FIR Citing 'Strong Likelihood' Of Influencing Victim

Ritika Verma

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Ritika Verma

AP High Court Declines Anticipatory Bail To Cop Booked In Rape FIR Citing 'Strong Likelihood' Of Influencing Victim

Ritika Verma

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Ritika Verma

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers