Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:35036 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 566 of 2025 Applicant :- Vishnu Mishra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Chandra Dwivedi,Uday Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J. 1. Counter affidavit along with vakalatnama filed by Sri Ram Mohan Mishra, Advocate on behalf of the complainant is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for the complainant. 3. The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 57 of 2025 u/s 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) B.N.S., Police Station- Bihar, District- Unnao. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that some toxic material was given to the applicant by the complainant of the present case, thereafter, applicant's signatures were obtained on the alleged sale deed, which was registered by selling the property in question. He further submits that complaint was made by the applicant to the police for lodging the F.I.R., but no action was taken, but at the same time, the complainant, who is chairman of Nagar Panchayat, lodged F.I.R. of the case in question by misusing his position. He also submits that the applicant is ready to cooperate in the investigation, hence, he is entitled for anticipatory bail. 5. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the prayer of the applicant and submits that sum of more than Rs. 32 lakhs was transferred in the account of the applicant on several dates in installments as sale consideration and the sale deed in question was executed on 19.10.2024. Learned counsel for the complainant also submits that the applicant sold out the property of his father by claiming himself as recorded tenure holder on the basis of fabricated identity card etc. He also submits that no further investigation is necessary, hence, the applicant is not entitled for anticipatory bail. 6. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and going through the contents of the F.I.R. as well as other relevant documents, it is evident that the applicant seems to be an imposter and the sale deed was executed on 19.10.2024 and the amount of the sale consideration was already transferred in the account of the applicant on several dates. Therefore, no case for anticipatory bail is made out. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is rejected. Order Date :- 9.6.2025 Arpan Digitally signed by :- ARPAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench