Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:4059 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2068 of 2024 Applicant :- Smt. Shyama Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record. 2. Instant application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the accused-applicant on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 558 of 2022, under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station-Kotwali Dehat, District-Gonda. 3. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 09.09.2024 following order was passed, wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- "The present application has been filed by the applicant Smt. Shyama seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.558 of 2022 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Gonda. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that the applicant in connivance with the co-accused persons by preparing forged documents has got registered the will deed and consequently has purchased the disputed land on the basis of forged document. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a old lady of 70 years and illiterate. She is bonafide purchaser. The offence is triable by Magistrate. Investigation in this case is going on. Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant shall cooperate in the investigation. He further submits that co-accused persons namely Daya Prakash Shukla, Rajendra, Vipin Kumar Shukla, Prahlad Shukla have been granted regular bail by coordinate Benches of this Court. Learned Addl. Government Advocate has opposed the bail prayer, however could not dispute the fact that the co-accused persons have been granted regular bail by this Court. Perused the record. On due consideration to the age of the applicant and the facts that the offence is triable by Magistrate, the applicant has no criminal history, the applicant is the purchaser, 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, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned. The applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and she will not influence the witnesses. The accused-applicant shall report to the concerned police station/investigating officer within twenty days from today and 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. In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection. List on 25.9.2024. In the meantime, learned A.G.A. shall file objections/counter affidavit." 4. From perusal of the order dated 09.09.2024, 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 thorough considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the State has also failed to substantiate that the present applicant is not cooperating with the investigation proceedings. 5. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby disposed of while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Smt. Shyama till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall make herself 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. 6. In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection. [Shree Prakash Singh,J.] Order Date :- 21.1.2025 Mohd. Sharif Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench