Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:19898 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 304 of 2025 Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Rastogi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Anuj Kudesia,Surya Prakash Singh,Vikas Kumar Agrawal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for opposite party-State. 2. First anticipatory bail application has been filed with regard to case crime No.556 of 2024, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, P.S. Bangermau, District Unnao. 3. As per contents of first information report, applicant is purchaser of a property which has been sold allegedly by imposter by fabrication of a sale-deed dated 31.03.2023. 4. It has been submitted by learned counsel for applicant that he has been falsely implicated in the charges levelled against him which could be evident from the fact that there is no allegation levelled against him of either impersonating the actual owner of property or being instrumental in fabrication or forgery of the sale-deed. It is submitted that applicant in fact is the vendee of plot in question and in terms of registered sale- deed, the same has also been mutated in the revenue record. It is also submitted that as per the allegations levelled in FIR, plot in question does not belong to the informant and therefore sections imputed are clearly not made out. It is submitted that applicant does not have any previous criminal history. 5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed anticipatory bail application but does not dispute the same. 6. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, it appears from allegations levelled in the FIR that the informant is not the owner of plot in question and only allegation levelled against applicant is of being a vendee of plot without any allegation against him of being impersonator of the actual owner. It is admitted that there is no previous criminal history against the applicant. Learned counsel for applicant has also provided an undertaking of applicant that he shall cooperate in the investigation. 7. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the that the liberty of the applicant may be protected till filing of police report u/s 173(2) Cr.P.C in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98. 8. In view of the above, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant- Rajesh Kumar Rastogi shall be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid Case Crime number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/S.H.O. concerned with the following conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall make himself/herself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that 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/her from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; (iii) that the applicant(s) shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that in case charge-sheet is submitted the applicant(s) shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; (v) that the applicant(s) shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; (vi) that the applicant(s) shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; (vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions, benefit of this order would not be available to applicant(s). 9. The application stands allowed. Order Date :- 9.4.2025 Subodh/- Digitally signed by :- SUBODH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench