HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1142 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Sri Dharm Raj Mishra, the learned counsel for the applicants as well as Sri Mohd. Asif Khan, the learned Additional Government Advocate-I appearing on behalf of the State and Sri Raghvendra Singh, Advocate who has put in appearance on behalf of the informant and filed his vakalatnama, which is taken on record. 2. The instant application has been filed by the applicants seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. bearing Case Crime No.92 of 2025, under Sections 190, 191(2), 115(2), 351(3), 352, 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) B.N.S., registered at Police Station Itiyathok, District Gonda. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 30.04.2025 on an application filed under Section 173(4) BNSS filed by the informant against nine persons including the applicants stating that the informant's father Sheshram had died on 13.08.2023. The informant is a married woman but she used to reside mostly with her father as her mother had died when she was aged about one year. The informant stated that she has no siblings. The accused persons wrongly got the property of the informant's father mutated in their names falsely claiming that he had died issueless and they denied status of the informant as daughter of late Sheshram. The F.I.R. states that upon coming to know about the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dharm Raj Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Smt. Sharda Devi And Another .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) aforesaid facts she is contesting the matter. 4. In the affidavit filed in support of the anticipatory bail-application it has been contended that the applicant no.1 is a woman aged 60 years and the applicant no.2 is a boy aged about 17 years, they are innocent, they have no criminal history and they have falsely been implicated in the present case. It has also been submitted on behalf of the applicants that a co-accused Sudhanshu Upadhyay has already been granted bail in the present case by a coordinate Bench of this court by means of an order dated 28.07.2025, passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.6862 of 2025. 5. The learned A.G.A.-I has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and he has submitted that as per his instructions the applicant is not cooperating with the investigation, however instructions do not refer to any specific applicant. 6. The learned counsel for the informant has also opposed the anticipatory bail application and he has stated that the applicant no.1 is aunt of the informant and the applicant no.2 is her cousin. He has submitted that all the accused persons have committed the offending acts in order to grab the property of informant. He has further submitted that the applicant has filed an application for setting aside the ex-parte mutation order on which an interim order has been passed staying the operation of mutation order. 7. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that operation of the mutation order has already been kept in abeyance on an application of the informant; that the parties claim to be belonging to same family and there is a property dispute between them, which is pending consideration of the competent court coupled with the fact that the applicant no.1 is a woman aged 60 years, the applicant no.2 is a boy aged 17 years, having no criminal history and without making any observations which may affect the outcome of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for granting anticipatory bail to the applicants. 8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed. In the event of arrest/ appearance of NABAIL No. 1142 of 2025 2 applicants-Smt. Sharda Devi and Himanshu Upadhyay before the learned Trial Court in the aforesaid case crime, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing 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 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. September 2, 2025 Ram. NABAIL No. 1142 of 2025 3 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench