Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:37063 Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 765 of 2025 Applicant :- Smt. Kanti Devi (In The Fir Kanti Devi) Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime/FIR No. 0199/2025, under Section 419, 420, 467, 468, 447, 427 and 506 of IPC, P.S.-Kotwali Ayodhya, District- Ayodhya. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that by showing the wrong boundaries and without any order of the Court, the land belonging to Kalika Tiwari, which was purchased by the complainant, is sought to be forcibly taken into the possession by the accused-applicant as well as co-accused persons. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a woman having no prior criminal antecedent. The land in dispute, i.e., Gata No. 476 Ka, originally belonged to Kalika Tiwari. The applicant is a bona-fide purchaser, having acquired the property from Kalika Tiwari, whereas the complainant claims to have purchased the same land from Pramod Tiwari. However, the sale deed in favour of the complainant has already been rejected by the competent civil court. The judgment and decree passed in Civil Suit No. 12/2004 by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), FTC, Faizabad, in the matter of Kalika Prasad Tiwari vs. Vimla Prasad Tiwari, are on record. It is further submitted that the dispute is primarily of a civil nature and the FIR was lodged after an inordinate delay of seven years. Co-accused Smt. Kusum Mishra and another have already been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 20.06.2025 in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 482 BNSS No. 765 of 2025. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedent, is not a convict, and is willing to cooperate with the investigation. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application, submitting that the investigation is still going on. Considering that the offences are triable by a Magistrate, the delay in lodging the FIR, the Civil Court’s judgment in Regular Suit No. 12 of 2004, and the applicant’s undertaking to cooperate with the investigation, and without entering into the merits of the case, this Court, in light of the decision in Sushila Aggarwal & Others v. State (NCT of Delhi) & Another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, finds it appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C. In view of the above, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant 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:- The applicant shall report to the investigating officer within ten days from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. She shall cooperate in the investigation and she 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. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. Order Date :- 1.7.2025/R.C. Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench