In a packed courtroom that buzzed with quiet tension, the Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) on Friday declined to grant anticipatory bail to folk singer and social media satirist Neha Singh Rathore, who faces several serious charges under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and the Information Technology Act. Justice Brij Raj Singh reserved the order earlier this week and finally pronounced it on December 5, bringing an end-at least for now-to a high-profile legal tussle that has caught national attention.
Background
Rathore is booked in Case Crime No. 0111/2025 at Hazratganj police station, Lucknow, for a series of tweets posted after the Pahalgam terror attack of 22 April 2025, in which 26 Hindu tourists were killed. According to the FIR, her posts allegedly stoked communal disharmony, criticized the government in a manner described as “anti-national,” and were widely circulated in Pakistan, where they were reportedly praised.
The applicant argued that she was falsely implicated and that her tweets were no more than dissent-an essential democratic right. Her counsel insisted that Section 152 BNS (replacing sedition) requires clear intent to cause rebellion, which they claimed was missing. They also pointed out that she resides in Bihar, not Lucknow, allowing her to move anticipatory bail directly before the High Court under the Ankit Bharti judgment’s “special circumstances” clause.
But the State painted a very different picture. The Government Advocate told the Court that Rathore not only avoided multiple summonses but also “kept changing her location,” making the investigation difficult. A detailed report from the police stated she failed to appear despite clear directions from both the High Court and Supreme Court.
Court’s Observations
Justice Singh began by acknowledging that the applicant was indeed entitled to approach the High Court directly because she did not live within the Sessions Court’s jurisdiction. However, the judge quickly moved to the merits-particularly the nature of the tweets and her conduct during the investigation.
The Court noted that the tweets were posted during an “extremely sensitive moment,” immediately after the terror killings. One tweet questioning the Prime Minister’s Bihar rally, another accusing the ruling party of wanting to push India into war, and yet another challenging reports about victims’ religion were specifically quoted.
The bench observed, “The tweets posted by the applicant are against the Prime Minister of India, and his name has been used in a disrespectful manner.”
Another turning point was the Supreme Court’s earlier refusal to quash the FIR. The apex court had allowed Rathore only to raise her objections later at the stage of framing of charges. Justice Singh emphasized that this directive, being binding, restricted the High Court from making deeper comments on whether offences like mutiny or promoting subversive activities were actually made out.
The Court said bluntly that Rathore’s “non-cooperation is evident”, citing police reports showing repeated failure to appear before the investigating officer. This, the judge suggested, weakened her plea for any protective relief.
Decision
In the final analysis, the High Court held that this was not a fit case for granting anticipatory bail. Justice Singh stated that more than seven months had passed since the FIR, yet the applicant had not cooperated at all. With the Supreme Court’s directions in view and the ongoing sensitivity of the case, the Court concluded: “No case for anticipatory bail is made out. The application is accordingly rejected.” The judge, however, clarified that Rathore remains free to pursue other remedies available under law.
Case Title: Neha Singh Rathore @ Neha Kumari vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Another
Case No.: Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 482 BNSS No. 687 of 2025
Case Type: Anticipatory Bail Application
Decision Date: 05 December 2025
