Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:22346 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2843 of 2024 Applicant :- Noor Jahan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Yadav,Dinesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Brijesh Kumar Kuldeep Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. 1. Heard Mr. Harish Chandra, learned counsel for applicant whose power filed today is taken on record, learned A.G.A. for opposite party no.1- State and Mr. Brijesh Kumar Kuldeep, learned counsel for opposite party no.2-complainant. 2. First anticipatory bail application has been filed with regard to case crime No.45 of 2023, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, P.S. Mankapur, District Gonda. 3. As per contents of first information report, applicant along with co-accused is said to have been instrumental in execution of a forged power of attorney dated 30.09.2021 and to have executed a subsequent sale-deed dated 26.10.2021 on that basis. It has been indicated that the informant is actual owner of the property who was impersonated during execution of registered power of attorney. 4. It is submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in the charges levelled against her which would be evident from the fact that FIR does not indicate any specific role attributed to her in the alleged fabrication of the power of attorney dated 30.09.2021. It is submitted that applicant has been nominated only on the basis of being daughter-in-law of the main accused Imam Ali who impersonated the informant. It is submitted that applicant has cooperated during the course of investigation whereafter, charge-sheet has been filed. It is submitted that applicant does not have any previous criminal history. 5. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for complainant have opposed anticipatory bail application with the submission that applicant's role in fabrication of the power of attorney as well as in the impersonation and subsequent execution of sale-deed is quite evident from the contents of FIR itself. It is however admitted that applicant cooperated during the course of investigation and there is no previous criminal history. 6. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, it appears that specific role has been attributed to all the co-accused with a general role having been allocated to the applicant of being party to the fabrication of her power of attorney and subsequent sale-deed. Applicant reveals herself to be daughter-in-law of the main accused Imam Ali. There is nothing adverse that she did not cooperate during the course of investigation and that she does not have any previous criminal history. 7. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the liberty of the applicant may be protected in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98. 8. In view of the above, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant- Noor Jahan, shall be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid Case Crime number on her furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) 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; (ii) that the applicant(s) shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iii) that the applicant(s) shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness; (iv) that the applicant(s) shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted; (v) that in case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail. Any other reasonable restrictions/ conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed. 9. It is made clear that the observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the trial Judge in forming her independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. 10. The application stands allowed. Order Date :- 21.4.2025 Subodh/- Digitally signed by :- SUBODH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- SUBODH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- SUBODH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench