Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:11802 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1782 of 2025 Applicant :- Varun Kumar Shukla @ Ranu Shukla Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Kailash Nath Mishra,Rahul Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anil Kumar Pandey Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. Vakalatnama filed by Sri Anil Kumar Pandey, learned counsel on behalf of the informant is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 319 of 2023, under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 342, 452, 506, 120-B I.P.C., P.S.-Vibhuti Khand, District - Lucknow. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the dispute is with respect to execution of power of attorney by Prashant Singh in favour of the applicant and the informant, who is also the power of attorney holder, has lodged the F.I.R. while alleging that the applicant has committed cheat and fraud. He added that in fact, several power of attorneys were executed as the tenure holder Shiv Nandan executed power of attorney in favour of mother of the complainant and after some time, another power of attorney was executed in favour of the informant and after the death of Shiv Nandan, power of attorney was also executed in favour of Lal Mohammad by the sons of original tenure holder and further the power of attorney was executed in favour of Prashant Singh who subsequently executed power of attorney in favour of the applicant. He submits that the matter is civil in nature and the dispute can be settled by the court of civil competence but it is being given colour of criminality. He submits that criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para 18 of the bail application and the applicant is languishing in jail since 29.12.2024 and in case, the applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty and would co- operate in the trial proceedings. On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there are allegations against the applicant that he has committed cheat and fraud and there is documentary proof that the applicant was involved in committing cheat and fraude and investigation is continuing and he may tamper with the evidence, as such, he may not be enlarged on bail. Learned A.G.A. for the State has also vehemently opposed the prayer of bail and submitted that the applicant is involved in committing the aforesaid offence, as such, he is not entitled to be released on bail. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, it transpires that the matter is civil in nature and can be settled by the court of civil competence; prima facie there is no cogent piece of evidence against the applicant; criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para 18 of the bail application; the applicant is languishing in jail since 29.12.2024 and he has undertaken that he will not misuse the liberty of bail if granted 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 Varun Kumar Shukla @ Ranu Shukla 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. 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 :- 27.2.2025 Ram Murti Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench