Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:45423 Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2364 of 2025 Applicant :- Shivam Saxena Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Of U.P. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Sharma,Vivek Kumar Shukla,Yatindra Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. The accused-applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.0458 of 2024 under Section 318 (4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 351(2), 316(5), 319(2), 61(2), 111 BNS, Police Station Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that, as per the allegations in the prosecution case, the complainant transferred a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- to the account of the company and an additional Rs. 2,50,000/- was paid at the time of execution of the registry. Thus, a total amount of Rs.4,50,000/- was taken by the company as sale consideration. It is further submitted that the applicant was neither the owner of the land nor the landlord. The plot in question was registered in the name of one Amit Kumar. Initially, the applicant entered into an agreement to sell, and thereafter, by allegedly committing forgery, is said to have executed a forged sale deed. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is the Managing Director of the company. Co-accused persons, namely Akshit Saxena and Srikant Gupta, have been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide orders dated 10.01.2025 and 12.02.2025 respectively, copies of which have been annexed as Annexure-5 to the bail application. Similarly, co-accused Pramod Chandra Pandey has also been granted bail vide order dated 07.03.2025 by a coordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 2076 of 2025. The applicant seeks parity with the said co-accused persons. It is further submitted that the applicant has duly explained the criminal history of two cases in paragraph 18 of the bail application. Moreover, the essential ingredients constituting the offence under Section 111 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) are prima facie missing. The applicant is in judicial custody since 16.09.2024, and the charge sheet has already been filed. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and has submitted that the applicant is the managing director role of the applicant is distinguishable from the co-accused persons who have been granted bail. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as perused the record. On due consideration of the facts that the charge-sheet has been filed, the applicant is in custody since 16.09.2024, he has duly explained his criminal history, and also taking into account the bail orders granted to co-accused persons, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that it is a fit case for granting bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Shivam Saxena be released on bail in aforesaid first information report number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below concerned with the following conditions: (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iv) 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. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (v) The applicant 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 IPC (now Section 269 BNS). (vi) 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. (now Section 84 BNSS) is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the IPC (now Section 209 BNS). Order Date :- 5.8.2025 Madhu D.R/P.S Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench