Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:10571 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1949 of 2024 Applicant :- Raghavendra Pandey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Chandan Srivastava,Lavkush Yadav,Rajneesh Kumar Singh,Yogesh Somvanshi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Brij Bhushan Singh,Pranjal Apurva,Sandeep Kumar Mishra Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record. Instant application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail in FIR No. 0090 of 2023, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 504 and 506 of IPC, Police Station Kotwali Kotwali Nagar, District Ayodhya. The notice has been issued to the complainant/opposite party no. 2 and as per office report, the same has been served 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 applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- "The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime/FIR No. 90/2023, under Sections 420/467/468/471/504/506 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Ayodhya. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 16.03.2000, the applicant by affixing a photo of some other person in place of the father of the complainant Shiv Mohan @ Shiv Prasad got prepared a forged power of attorney and sold his share of land. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the alleged offence is 22 years and 11 months old. Both the complainant and the applicant are family members. The applicant has already filed a suit for cancellation of sale deeds dated 16.01.2021, 18.01.2021 and 19.01.2021 which were executed by the applicant and his brother in favour of the wife of the complainant and other family members. As a counter blast thereto, this FIR has been lodged. For cancellation of power of attorney executed in the year 2000, now a civil suit has been filed before the Civil Judge (Junior Division) Sadar, Faizabad by the complainant which is pending. It has been further submitted that the dispute is primarily civil in nature. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant undertakes that the applicant shall cooperate in the trial. Issue notice to respondent No. 2. Steps be taken within a week. Learned Addl. Government Advocate prays for and is allowed ten days' time to file counter affidavit. List on 19.09.2024. On due consideration to the argument advanced as well as perusal of the record and the fact that civil suits filed by both the parties are pending before the competent civil court; charge sheet has been filed; the applicant is not a previous convict and having no criminal history and also considering 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, as an interim measure, it would be appropriate to grant interim protection to the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C. Till the next date of listing, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial and he will not influence the witnesses. (2) The accused-applicant will remain present on each and every date fixed by the trial court. (3) The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court." From perusal of the order dated 28.08.2024, it transpires that State counsel has failed to demonstrate that there is any adversarial fact which are pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was 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 applicant is 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 applicant, namely, Raghavendra 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 protection. Order Date :- 17.2.2025 kkv/ Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench