Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:7556 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1942 of 2024 Applicant :- Mohammad Anish @ Anish Ahmad And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Nayak Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Santosh Kumar Srivastava Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record. Instant application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicants on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 555A of 2009, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Tanda, District Ambedkar Nagar. The notice has been issued to the complainant/opposite party no. 2 and as per office report, the same has been served through legal heir but no one is present for the complainant/opposite party no. 2. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 28.08.2024, the following order was passed wherein the present applicants have been granted interim anticipatory bail:- "The present application has been filed by the applicants Mohammad Anish @ Anish Ahmad Sageer Ahmad and Rais Ahmad seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No. 555A/2009 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Tanda, District Ambedkar Nagar. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. In the prosecution case it is alleged that the father of the applicant Lal Mohammad, who was Chairman of Sakrawal (North East) Handloom Weavers Cooperative Society Ltd. Tanda had taken two power handloom sheds and a gowdown along with office, on rent to the tune of Rs.700/- on 1.9.1997 regarding which an agreement was executed. It is alleged that after the death of his father Lal Mohd. the applicants by forging the agreement have given the building on rent and also 12 power looms also on rent and has forged the signatures of the lesser and lessee on the agreement. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that Final Report was filed in this case, which was rejected by the trial court and treated as State case. The dispute is regarding the tenancy which is primarily a civil dispute. An inquiry was conducted by the Sub Divisional Magistrate Ambedkar Nagar who found that the complainant has not produced any certificate to show his bonafide. He submits that the dispute is civil in nature. The applicant has no previous criminal history. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant. He prays for two weeks' time to file objections/counter affidavit. Perused the record. Issue notice to respondent No.2. Steps be taken within a week. On due consideration to the above and prima facie from perusal of the record the dispute appears to be civil in nature, the applicant has no previous criminal history, 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 applicants under Section 438 Cr.P.C till the next date of listing. Till the next date of listing, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicants Mohammad Anish @ Anish Ahmad Sageer Ahmad and Rais Ahmad 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 applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; 2. that the applicants shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; 3. that the applicants 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. List on 19.9.2024." From perusal of the order dated 28.08.2024, it transpires that the State counsel has failed to demonstrate that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicants were enlarged on an interim anticipatory bail after thoroughly considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State has also failed to submit any fact that the applicants are not cooperating with the investigation proceeding or otherwise any glaring fact which can adversely affect the merit of the case. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicants, namely, Mohammad Anish @ Anish Ahmad, Sageer Ahmad and Rais Ahmad till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; (iii) that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that the applicants shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicants 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 :- 5.2.2025 kkv/ Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench