HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1175 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Sri Ajeet Kumar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant as well as Sri Ayush Sharma, the learned State Counsel and Shri Farooq Ayoob, the learned counsel for the complainant. 2. The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R./Case Crime No.781 of 2025 under Sections 318(4), 316(2), 352, 351(3), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 3(5) B.N.S. registered at Police Station- Kotwali, District- Barabanki. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged by the opposite party No.2 on 14.08.2025 against eight persons, including the applicant, stating that the informant's father had two brothers. Co-accused persons Virendra Kumar, Vinod Kumar, Pramod Kumar and Anoop Singh are sons of the informant's uncle Chatrapati. It is alleged that a written settlement regarding partition of the family property was executed and thereafter, the persons entered into possession of their shares of the property. However, the aforesaid four co-accused persons, who are cousins of the complainant, started disputing the settlement and, thereafter, the informant's uncle Prem Narayan Verma has filed a suit for partition wherein an interim order was passed on 30.05.2011 directing the parties to maintain status-quo. The informant has alleged that although interim order is still operative, co-accused persons- Virendra Kumar, Vinod Kumar, Pramod Kumar and Anoop Singh executed a sale deed dated 27.06.2025 in respect of the property in dispute and the other accused persons Satish Kumar, Ranjeet Kumar and Pawan Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajeet Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Pawan Kumar .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Kumar (the applicant) were also involved in commission of the offence. 4. Learned A.G.A. has raised a preliminary objection that the applicant has approached this Court directly without first filing an application seeking anticipatory bail before the Session Court. 5. Replying to the aforesaid objection, the learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that it has specifically been pleaded in para-5 of the affidavit filed in support of the application that the informant is an Advocate and presently, he is the President of the Bar Association, District- Barabanki and no counsel practicing in District Court, Barabanki is ready to file an application seeking anticipatory bail before the Session Court, Barabanki. 6. I am of the view that the aforesaid averment made in the affidavit filed in support of the anticipatory bail application clearly makes out an exceptional case justifying the applicant directly approaching this court seeking anticipatory bail. 7. In the affidavit filed in support of the anticipatory bail application it has been stated that the applicant is innocent having no criminal history and he has been falsely been implicated in the present case. 8. A bare perusal of the FIR indicates that the allegations are principally directed against co-accused persons Virendra Kumar, Vinod Kumar, Pramod Kumar and Anoop Singh that they have executed the sale deed in violation of an interim order passed in a civil suit regarding which an application under Order 39 Rule 2A CPC could have been filed but there is no averment to this effect. The allegation against the applicant is that he is also involved in commission of the offence, without specifically stating about any overt act committed by the applicant. 9. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances 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 applicant. 10. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. In the event of arrest/ appearance of applicant before the learned Trial Court in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing personal bond and two solvent sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of NABAIL No. 1175 of 2025 2 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/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. September 9, 2025 -Amit K- NABAIL No. 1175 of 2025 3 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench