Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:4870 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1848 of 2024 Applicant :- Deena Nath Pandey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anoop Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Alok Srivastava Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. It is apparent from the order dated 20.8.2024 that Mr. Alok Srivastava was present on the first date of hearing and in his presence the interim order was passed thereafter several dates were fixed but no counter affidavit has been filed yet and on 24.10.2024, the stop order was also passed. Thereafter, the case was listed yesterday but the counsel for the complainant was not present and no request is made for adjournment, and, therefore, the case was fixed for today. Today also, learned counsel for the complainant is not present. Under the aforesaid circumstances, the Court is proceeding to hear the matter. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. Instant application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the accused/applicant on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.553 of 2022 under Sections 504, 506, 467, 468 I.P.C. P.S. Nawabganj, District Gonda. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 20.8.2024, following order was passed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- "1. The present application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Complaint Case No.553 of 2022 under Section 504/506/467/468 I.P.C., Police Station Nawabganj, District Gonda. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and Shri Alok Srivastava, Advocate, who has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant, which is taken on record as well as perused the record. 3. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that the applicant, who is the marginal witness of the sale deed dated 3.9.2021 of gata no.22 rakba 0.04101 hectare, has conspired to get their sale deed executed as a part of the land included in the above sale deed has already been sold vide sale deed dated 2.11.2019. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the dispute is primarily civil in nature. The applicant is only the marginal witness. He has no clue regarding the forgery, if any, committed. The dispute appears to be regarding demarcation of boundaries of the two plots. The offence is triable by Magistrate. The applicant has no criminal history. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant shall cooperate in the trial. 5. Learned Addl. Government Advocate and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. They pray for and is allowed two weeks' time to file objections/counter affidavit. 6. Perused the record. 7. On due consideration to the arguments advanced, perusal of the record and the facts that the applicant is neither seller nor purchaser he is the marginal witness and he has no criminal antecedents as also the judgment in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1 and without entering into the merit of the case, it would be appropriate to grant interim protection to the applicant till the next date of listing. 8. Till the next date of listing, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant Deena Nath Pandey shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:- 1. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; 2. that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; 3. that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; 4. that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the anticipatory bail. Such other reasonable conditions which the learned trial court may deem fit may be imposed. 9. List on 3.9.2024." From the perusal of the counter affidavit filed by the State, there seems to be no adversarial fact and the detailed discussions on merit is done in the order dated 20.8.2024. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby disposed of while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Deena Nath Pandey till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; (iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection. Order Date :- 24.1.2025 Ram Murti Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench