Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:27255 Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3272 of 2025 Applicant :- Deepu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Dixit,Mehendra Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Gaurav Dixit,Kartikeya Saran,Ram Lal Mishra Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Vakalatnama, filed by Sri Prakhar Tandon, Advocate on behalf of the applicant, is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Prakhar Tandon, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and Ms. Shruti Taneja, Advocate holding brief of Sri Kartikeya Saran, counsel for the informant. Perused the record. 3. The instant bail application, under Section 439 Cr.P.C., has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 184 of 2024, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 447, 471, 147/120B I.P.C., Police Station- Bilhaur, District- West (Commissionerate Kanpur Nagar), during pendency of the trial. 4. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The disputed property was purchased by the applicant and co-accused Pradeep Bajpai through sale deed dated 15.03.2024 executed by the co-accused, Savitri alias Raju. The applicant himself is the victim of the fraud. The sale consideration was duly paid by the applicant. The case is purely civil in nature. The applicant is in jail since 07.01.2025, having no criminal history. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 5. Learned A.G.A. and counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 6. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that the case is purely civil in nature. The sale deed records that sale consideration was paid by the applicant and the co-accused. At this stage, there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Further, the applicant has no criminal antecedents and has remained confined for more than one month and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 7. Let the applicant, Deepu involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that: i. the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court. 8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 27.2.2025 S.S. Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad