HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 186 of 2024 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Shri Arvind Pratap Singh, the learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Mohd. Asif Khan, the learned AGA-I for the State. 2. On 04.12.2024, after hearing learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.-I for the State, this Court had passed the following order: "Sri Piyush Kumar Singh, Advocate has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant, which is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Piyush Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing for the complainant as well as learned AGA for the State. The instant application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on anticipatory bail in FIR No. 745 of 2024, under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2) of BNS, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Gonda. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is a marginal witness of the sale-deed in question. He also submits that both the parties have got executed the sale-deed, though there is a dispute with respect to the boundaries which are mentioned in the sale deed. He added that this is not a case of impersonation but this case relates to a dispute of boundaries which are mentioned in the sale-deed and the same are questioned and, thus, prima facie this seems to be a matter of civil in nature which has been given colour of criminality. He next added that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he undertakes that he would always cooperate with the investigation Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arvind Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Piyush Kumar Singh Karan Goswami .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) proceeding and would never abscond. He also submits that there is an apprehension that the police will arrest the applicant and, as such, he may be enlarged on anticipatory bail. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the complainant has vehemently opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that applicant is the grand-son of the vendor and there is a clear cut evidence that the present applicant including other co-accused persons have committed cheat and fraud, which is also evident from the order of Tehsildar. Learned counsel appearing for the State has also supported the version of learned counsel for the complainant and submits that the investigation is going on and there is possibility that the applicant will flee away and will not cooperate with the investigation proceeding. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and after perusal of the record, it transpires that the applicant is a marginal witness of the sale-deed and there is a dispute with respect to boundaries which are mentioned in the registered sale- deed executed by the grand-father of the present applicant; prima facie the fact remains that there is no ample evidence that the applicant is not cooperating with the investigation proceeding and he has undertaken that he will not abscond from any proceeding, so far as the present matter is concerned. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this Court finds it to be a fit case for grant of interim anticipatory bail. Accordingly, till the next date of listing, the present applicant-Karan Goswami, shall be released forthwith, in case of his arrest, in the aforesaid FIR (supra) on an interim anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two solvent sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with 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 them 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 in case chargesheet is submitted the applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial; (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; (vi) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; (vii) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court concerned shall have the liberty to cancel the bail. List/put up this matter in second week of January, 2025. In the meantime, learned counsel for the opposite parties shall file their counter affidavits." NABAIL No. 186 of 2024 2 3. The State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith copies of material collected during investigation. 4. The learned A.G.A. did not point out any violation of the conditions of interim anticipatory bail by the applicant. Nothing has come to light which may persuade this court to take a view, other than the view taken at the time of granting interim anticipatory bail to the applicant. 5. In view of above, the interim order dated 04.12.2024 is made absolute and the anticipatory bail application is allowed in terms of the aforesaid order. September 23, 2025 -Amit K- NABAIL No. 186 of 2024 3 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench