Kanpur “Looting Bride” Divyanshi Rathore Granted Bail Amid Gaps in Police Case

Kanpur: In a significant turn of events in Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh, the court has ordered the release of the woman allegedly involved in a high-profile “loot bride” case, Divyanshi Rathore, citing lack of credible evidence from the police. The police had claimed that Rs 8 crore were deposited in her accounts, but the court found the submissions insufficient and granted her bail on a personal bond of Rs 1 lakh.

Court Highlights Gaps in Police Investigation

The presiding court rejected the police request for a 14-day judicial remand, emphasizing that no solid or legally admissible evidence was presented against Divyanshi. The bench expressed displeasure over the investigation, underlining the need for impartiality and proper verification during the probe.

Background of the Case

Aditya Kumar Lochav, a 2019-batch Sub-Inspector from BB Nagar, Bulandshahr, married Divyanshi Chaudhary of Mawana, Meerut, on 17 February 2024. Following their marriage, he filed a complaint at Gwaltaoli Police Station in Kanpur, where he is also posted. Allegations claimed that Divyanshi rarely stayed at home after marriage and focused on B.Ed and CTET preparations while residing in her parental home.

The police initially alleged that Divyanshi had married multiple men, including two bank managers and another police officer, implicated them in criminal cases, and extorted large sums of money. Her accounts were reportedly holding Rs 8 crore, earning her the “loot bride” label in police reports.

Conflict of Interest in Investigation

The defense highlighted that both the complainant and the investigating officer are stationed at the same police station, raising concerns about impartiality in the investigation. The court noted this point, questioning the credibility of the probe.

Lack of Evidence Leads to Bail

Divyanshi Rathore was booked under 12 sections of the BNS Act, with police applying for remand under eight of them. The court, however, found that the police failed to provide sufficient evidence to justify her custody. Consequently, she was released on a personal bond of Rs 1 lakh.

This case underscores the judiciary’s insistence on thorough investigation and the need for concrete evidence, especially when allegations involve significant financial claims and public attention.