Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2874 of 2025 Applicant :- Ashok Kumar @ Ashok Kumar Gupta Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Vikas Yadav,Shivam Srivastava,Subhash Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajnish Kumar,J. Shri Vikas Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has falsely been implicated as he is only a witness in the sale deeds dated 12.05.2022 and 21.05.2022 executed in favour of the sister-in-law (Bhabhi) and wife respectively, which have been executed by an imposter. A suit for cancellation of sale deeds have been filed by the complainant Ram Bhulan @ Raj Kumar in the court of civil judge, junior division, Utraula, District- Balrampur, which has been registered as Regular Suit No.30 of 2025, 31 of 2025 respectively, in which the purchasers have already put in appearance. He further submits that the complainant has moved an application before the Circle Officer, Utraula, District- Balrampur on 16.01.2025 stating therein that he has entered into a compromise with the respondents, therefore, he does not want any investigation in the matter. He has also filed an affidavit. However perusal of the application and affidavit filed alongwith the same contained in annexure no.2 to the application does not disclose as to what compromise has been entered into between the parties. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the F.I.R. No.0008 dated 20.01.2025, under Sections- 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. has been lodged in Police Station- Rehra Bazar, District- Balrampur in regard to seven sale deeds alleging same allegations. One of the purchaser has filed Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.1225 of 2025; Sanjay Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and 2 others and his arrest has been stayed by this Court till filing of the charge sheet. However, the charge sheet has not been filed. On a query being put as to when the respondents i.e. the purchaser has already put in appearance in the suit and the parties have entered into a compromise, why the suit has not been got decided, if it is to be decided on the basis of compromise, learned counsel for the applicant prays for some time to seek instructions. As prayed by learned counsel for the applicant, list on 16.04.2025 as fresh in top 20 cases to enable him to seek instructions in the matter. In the meantime, learned A.G.A. shall also seek instructions in regard to the compromise entered into between the parties and the status of the suits. Order Date :- 5.4.2025 Haseen U. Before rising and signing the aforesaid order, learned counsel for the applicant appeared alongwith learned A.G.A and submits that it has inadvertently been mentioned in the application and argued before this Court that one of the sale deed was executed in favour of the wife of the applicant, whereas the same was executed in favour of the wife of the friend of the applicant. Thus, he wants to not press this application with liberty to file fresh with proper disclosures. To which there is no objection by learned A.G.A. In view of above, this application is dismissed as not pressed with liberty as aforesaid. As prayed by learned counsel for the applicant, the office is directed to return the certified copy/copies annexed with this application to the learned counsel for the applicant in accordance with law after keeping photocopy/photocopies on record. ...................................................................(Rajnish Kumar, J.) Order Date :- 5.4.2025 Haseen U. Digitally signed by :- HASEENUDDIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench