Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:31855 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 496 of 2025 Applicant :- Usha Mishra ( In Fir Usha Devi ) Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Nath Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for State and opposite party No.2 in person. Earlier on 6th May, 2025 following order had been passed:- "Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for State- opposite party No.1 and opposite party No.2 in person. First anticipatory bail application has been filed with regard to case crime No. 502 of 2023 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Gonda. As per contents of F.I.R., allegation levelled is that a forged and fabricated sale deed was executed on 20th August, 1971 the mutation of which was rejected on 7th September, 2020. Allegation levelled against the applicant is that she being mother-in-law of main accused Brijesh Kumar Awasthi is a gang member of the said person and is involved in fabrication of various such sale deeds. Learned counsel for applicant submits that she has been falsely implicated in the charges levelled against her and even otherwise there is no order of any competent court declaring the sale deed dated 20th August, 1971 as fabricated. It is submitted that dispute pertains only to a civil nature. The informant in person as well as A.G.A. have opposed bail application with submission that the applicant has a long previous criminal history with regard to fabrication of various sale deeds and is in collusion with main accused Brijesh Kumar Awasthi, being his mother in law. Learned A.G.A. on the basis of instructions submits that the applicant is not cooperating in the investigation due to which charge sheet could not be filed. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and upon perusal of material on record, prima facie subject to evidence led in trial, it appears that primary gist of allegation at this stage has been levelled upon main accused Brijesh Kumar Awasthi of fabrication of sale deed, the mutation on the basis of which was sought after almost 50 years. The applicant undertakes to cooperate in the investigation. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and after perusal of the record, this Court finds it to be a fit case of interim anticipatory bail. Let the accused-applicant Usha Mishra ( in F.I.R. Usha Devi ) as an interim measure be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the Constitution Bench judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98. The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court. In the event of arrest, the accused-applicant shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on bail furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/S.H.O. concerned on the following conditions:- (i) That the accused-applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witness. The accused-applicant will remain present as and when the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned call(s) for investigation/interrogation. The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court. (ii) In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection. List this case on 19th May, 2025 in top ten category along with service report. Objections may be filed in the meantime. The applicant is directed to produce herself before the investigating officer on 12th May, 2025 at 2.00 P.M. Learned A.G.A. shall obtain instructions whether the applicant has cooperated in the investigation or not." In pursuance thereof, affidavits has been filed by the opposite party No.2 to submit that applicant in fact did not appear before the Investigating Officer on the date fixed. Learned A.G.A. however has been provided written instructions by the Investigating Officer dated 27th May, 2025, which is taken on record, to the effect that applicant has not cooperated even after interim anticipatory granted to her and has not appeared for the purposes of providing statement. Learned counsel for applicant however has disputed the said fact with submission that applicant in fact has appeared before the Investigating Officer on 26th May, 2025. Earlier vide order dated 19th May, 2025, it has been noticed that the applicant admittedly did not appear before the Investigating Officer as was directed on account of the fact that she was unwell. In view of aforesaid earlier order as well as the report submitted by the Investigating Officer dated 27th May, 2025, it is evident that applicant is misusing the interim anticipatory which has been granted to her. In view thereof, this court does not find any ground to grant indulgence to the applicant. The anticipatory bail application therefore is rejected granting liberty to applicant to apply for regular bail. Order Date :- 27.5.2025 prabhat Digitally signed by :- PRABHAT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench