Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:44523 Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 486 of 2025 Applicant :- Dayaram Tiwari @ Dayaram Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Sectt. Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Misra 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. The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No.258 of 2023, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Gonda. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 21.05.2025 has passed the following order:- "1. Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party. 3. Issue notice to opposite party No.2. 4. First anticipatory bail application has been filed with regard to case crime No. 258 of 2023, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Gonda. 5. As per contents of F.I.R., the plot in question belonged to the father of informant- Ram Kripal, who passed away while the informant and her brother are still minors and the property was therefore recorded in the their name under guardianship of the State. It is further stated that subsequently upon attaining majority, the brother of informant- Raksha Ram executed a registered Will deed in favour of informant in 2015 but subsequently a fabricated Will deed dated 15.01.2002 emerged allegedly executed by the deceased father of informant in which applicant is shown as marginal witness. 6. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in allegations against him and that even as per contents of FIR, the only role attributed to him is that of being a marginal witness in the Will deed dated 15.01.2002. It is, therefore, submitted that an unnecessary criminal colour is being sought to be given to a purely civil dispute. It is submitted that applicant is not a beneficiary of the alleged transaction. It is submitted that previous criminal history of two cases has already been explained. 7. Learned A.G.A. has opposed bail application with submission that the contents of FIR clearly indicate the aspect of forgery being committed on account of a deceased person. It is, however, admitted that previous criminal history of applicant has already been explained but charge-sheet has been filed. 8. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and upon perusal of material on record, prima facie, it appears that the only role assigned to applicant as per contents of FIR is of being a marginal witness in the Will deed dated 15.01.2002. The FIR indicates primary gist of allegations being levelled against co-accused Brijesh Kumar Awasthi. It does not appear at this stage, applicant is beneficiary of the alleged transaction. Thus, in view of law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1, it would be appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C./482 BNNS. 9. List this case on 04.07.2025, as fresh alongwith service report. 10. Objections may be filed in the meantime. 11. In view of above, interim anticipatory bail is granted to applicant providing that in the event of arrest, applicant Dayaram Tiwari @ Dayaram shall be released on interim bail on his/her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to following conditions:- (i) 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 tamper with the evidence; (ii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iii)The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; (iv)The applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; (v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail; Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed. " Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is nothing on record to show that applicant has not cooperated in the investigation. In compliance of the order passed by the court, he has filed the bonds and has been released on interim anticipatory bail. He has further undertaken to co-operate in the investigation. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant submitting that the investigation is going on. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that he will cooperate in the investigation. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the fact that offences are triable by magistrate, applicant has not misused the liberty of interim bail granted to him, coupled with the undertaking given by the applicant that he will cooperate in the investigation as also the interim protection granted by this Court vide order dated 21.05.2025 is made absolute in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98. The application stands allowed. Order Date :- 31.7.2025 Saurabh Yadav/- Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench