Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:2067 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 256 of 2025 Applicant :- Vishnu Tiwari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Misra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. 1. Heard Shri Manoj Kumar Misra, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No.879 of 2023, under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B and 506 IPC, P.S.- Kotwali Nagar, District- Gonda. 3. The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He submits that the allegation against the applicant is that he is a marginal witness in an alleged forged will which was got executed in the name of mother-in-law of Sunita Devi and the executor has been shown as the father of the complainant. He added that in fact the applicant had no knowledge with respect to any will deed executed in favour of Jamwanti, mother-in-law of Sunita Devi, as the same was never produced before any authority after execution of the will deed, since 1996 up till date. He also added that first information report was lodged for committing cheat & fraud to get executed will deed in favour of Jamwanti wherein, the applicant has been shown as the marginal witnesses. Identically situated co- accused Sunita Devi has been enlarged on anticipatory bail in criminal misc. anticipatory bail application under section 438 of Cr.P.C. No. 2716 of 2024 vide order dated 17.12.2024. He also submits that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is cooperating in the investigation proceedings and he will never abscond from the investigation proceedings as well as the trial proceedings. He also submits that there is acute apprehension that the applicant will be arrested by the police thus, submission is that the the applicant may be granted bail. 4. Per contra, learned AGA appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submitted that after thorough investigation, it was found that the applicant was involved in committing offence and as such, he is not entitled for any relief. 5. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of material placed on record, it transpires that the applicant is a marginal witness and he is said to be involved in committing offence whereas, the fact remains that a will deed was executed in year 1996 and again a will deed was executed in year 2003 wherein, the applicant is witness. The will is executed in favour of mother-in-law of Sunita Devi namely, Jamwanti and prima facie, Jamvanti is the beneficiary of the will deed. This Court has also taken note of fact that the will deed has never been produced for its execution after year 1996 up till date. The applicant has no previous criminal history. The present applicant is languishing in jail since 29.11.2024. Prima facie, there is no cogent piece of evidence against the applicant so as to connect him with the offence coupled with the fact that the applicant has undertaken that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. 6. Considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. 7. Let the applicant- Vishnu Tiwari involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial; (2) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. He shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code; (3) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; and (4) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. 8. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. 9. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case. [Shree Prakash Singh,J.] Order Date :- 10.1.2025 Mohd. Sharif/KR Digitally signed by :- RABINDRA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench