Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:36000 Court No. - 11 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 657 of 2025 Applicant :- Smt. Kusum Mishra (In F.I.R Kusum) And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Pandey,Ram Jeet Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J. Vakalatnama filed by Shri Vijay Nath, Advocate on behalf of complainant is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed by the applicants with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.0199/2025, under section - 419, 420, 467, 468, 447, 427 and 506 of IPC, police station - Kotwali Ayodhya, District - Ayodhya. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant no.1 is wife of applicant no.2 and the complainant is the 'bhabhi' of applicant no.2. He further submitted that the property in question was purchased in the name of applicant no.1 from the recorded tenure holder Kalika and the applicant no.2 is the witness in the said sale. As respondent no.2 and her husband also started claiming share in the said property and there is a dispute related to the property as applicants and the private respondent belong to the same family tree. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that no custodial interrogation is necessary as FIR of the case in question was lodged on 26.4.2025 and the applicant never misused the liberty given by the Investigating Officer and he may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the prayer and submitted that sufficient evidences are found but they do not dispute this fact that the applicant and private respondent belong to the same family and there is a property dispute. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and going through the contents of the F.I.R. as well as other relevant materials, it is evident that the applicants and private respondent belong to the same family and there is a property dispute. No custodial interrogation is necessary, therefore, the applicants are entitled for anticipatory bail. In case the applicants are taken into custody by Investigating Officer/Investigating Agency, they shall be released forthwith on anticipatory bail after taking personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount with the following conditions:- (i) The applicants shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. (ii) The applicants 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicants shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. With above directions, the anticipatory bail application is allowed. Order Date :- 20.6.2025 mks Digitally signed by :- MANISH SAXENA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench