Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:7158 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1998 of 2024 Applicant :- Ishan Ahmad @ Chotu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Suyesh Pradhan Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Suyesh Pradhan, learned counsel for the complainant and learned Counsel for the State as well as perused the material placed on record. The instant application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 212 of 2023, under Sections 406, 420, 506, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Sitapur. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 02.09.2024, the following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- "Supplementary Affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. The present application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 212 of 2023 under Sections 406, 420, 506, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Sitapur. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State as well as perused the record. Issue notice to respondent no.2. Steps be taken within a week. In the prosecution case it is alleged that the accused persons gave documents of a land to the complainant for selling the land to him. In consideration the complainant transferred Rs.19,55,000/- in the account of the brother of the applicant namely Aftab Ahmad. It is further alleged that the complainant gave Rs.10,95,000/- to the present applicant in cash. After payment, the complainant tried to verify the khatauni given to him by the accused persons at District Sitapur where it was found that khatauni was forged. When he confronted the accused persons, they said that they will sale their house to the complainant that also was found to be under agreement with one Pankaj Jaiswal. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent. The role of the applicant is distinct from the co-accused Aftab Ahmad, who has received the amount in his bank account. The allegation that some cash has been given to the applicant, is false. The offence is triable by Magistrate. The applicant has no criminal history. Charge-sheet in the matter has been filed. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant shall cooperate in the trial. Learned Addl. Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. He prays for and is allowed two weeks' time to file objections/counter affidavit. Perused the record. Considering the facts that the applicant has no criminal history, the offence is triable by Magistrate and role of the applicant prima facie can be distinct from the co-accused Aftab Alam 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. Till the next date of listing, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant 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. List on 24.9.2024." Learned counsel appearing for the complainant submits that the applicant is not cooperating in the investigation proceeding. From perusal of the order dated 02.09.2024, it transpires that the learned 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 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, Ishan Ahmad @ Chotu 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 :- 4.2.2025 kkv/ Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench