HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 917 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, Learned Counsel for the applicant, and Shri Angad Kumar Vishwakarma, Learned Addl. Government Advocate, for the state. 2. The applicant has filed this application seeking bail in F.I.R./Case Crime No. 339 of 2024 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 471, 504, 506, I.P.C., P.S. Hardi, District Bahraich. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an FIR lodged on 11/9/2024 in furtherance of an application under section 156(3) CrPC, filed against three persons, including the applicant, stating that applicant had executed a sale deed in respect of his agricultural holding on 16/12/1988 in favor of one Shivbalak. Shivbalak, in turn, sold the land to Rishi Ram through a sale deed dated 7/6/1989, and Rishi Ram sold the property to the informant on 8/8/1990. The informant had filed an application for mutation of his name, but believing his advocate, he did not pursue the matter. Later on, the applicant executed another sale deed in respect of the same land in favour of co-accused Dinesh Kumar Vishwakarma, and the co-accused Bishunnath had witnessed the execution of the sale deed. Afterwards, the informant came to know that his mutation application had been dismissed for want of prosecution, and he filed an application for setting aside the order dismissing the application in default, whereupon the matter was restored. 4. In the affidavit filed in support of the anticipatory bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent; he has falsely been implicated in the present case, and he has no criminal history. 5. Learned AGA has opposed the anticipatory bail application and submitted that investigation of the matter is still going on. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Manoj Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sukai .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) 6. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the F.I.R. states that although the informant had purchased the land in question in the year 1990, the same continued to be recorded in the revenue records in the name of the applicant; that there is no allegation that the informant has been divested of possession of the land in question; that there is no mention that the applicant has filed any application for cancellation of the sale-deed and that the applicant is a 62 years old person having no criminal history, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be granted anticipatory bail. 7. Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application stands allowed. 8. In the event of arrest/appearance of applicant- Sukai before the learned Trial Court in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two solvent sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of S.H.O./Court concerned on the following conditions and subject to any other conditions that may be fixed by the Trial Court: (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/her 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. August 26, 2025 A.Nigam ABAIL No. 917 of 2025 2 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANUJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench