Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:4009 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 585 of 2025 Applicant :- Raghvendra Pratap Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Prin. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Sahay Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. Sri Santosh Srivastava, Advocate has put in appearance by way of filing Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Santosh Srivastava, learned counsel appearing for the complainant and learned AGA for the State as well as perused the record. This is second bail application of the applicant. The first bail application was dismissed as not pressed vide order of this Court dated 07.01.2025 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 68 of 2025. The instant second bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No.433 of 2023, under Sections 323, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station BKT, Lucknow, District Lucknow. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that applicant is not the marginal witness and he is not the beneficiary of any way of the sale-deed in question. He next submits that no amount of sale consideration has ever been incredited in the the account of the applicant and one co-accused, namely, Pawan Singh, in whose account Rs. 40,000/- is incredited, has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 21.05.2024 passed in Crl. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. No. 657 of 2024. He next added that there is no evidence against the applicant so as to connect him in the instant matter and the applicant has six cases criminal history which has been explained and he is languishing in jail since 11.11.2024 and in case, the applicant is granted bail, he would not misuse the liberty and would never jump the bail and would co-operate in the trial proceedings. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the complainant has vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and submits that the applicant was the witness of the registered sale-deed and at the time of instituting the civil Suit, he took a plea that an agreement was entered in between the parties which prima facie shows that he has committed cheat and fraud. He also submits that there is evidence against the applicant that he is involved in the offence and there are six cases criminal history of the applicant and as such, he is not entitled to be released on bail. Learned AGA for the State has also supported the version of learned counsel for the complainant. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, it transpires that co-accused, in whose amount has been incredited, has already been granted anticipatory bail; this Court has noticed that the forged document is placed before the trial court in Suit, thus the applicant has liberty to approach the court concerned while filing the appropriate application; the applicant has explained six cases criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 11.11.2024 and he has undertaken that he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would co-operate in the trial proceedings. Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, 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 case of bail. Let the applicant-Raghvendra Pratap Singh 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 will 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. 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. 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. Order Date :- 21.1.2025 kkv/ Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench