HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9911 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and Shri Santosh Kumar Mishra, learned Advocate holding brief of Shri Vashu Deo Mishra, learned counsel for the complainant. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that the applicant, in collusion with co- accused Vibhor Saxena, prepared a forged lease deed with the intent to unlawfully acquire property belonging to the company, which was in the possession of Oriental Insurance Company. Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the role attributed to the applicant is identical to that of co-accused Vibhor Saxena. The offences are triable by a Magistrate. The applicant has disclosed his criminal antecedent of a single case and the charge sheet has already been filed. It is further submitted that co-accused Vibhor Singh, who is alleged to have played a similar role, has been granted anticipatory bail by the Court of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No. 5, Lucknow, copy of which is on record as Annexure RA-1 to the rejoinder affidavit. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shamshad Ahmad, Faraz Ahmad, Mohammad Shahzad Ahmad, Mohammad Taif Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Vashu Deo Mishra Mannu Singh .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) Learned AGA and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail application. It has been contended by the complainant’s counsel that the role of the applicant is distinguishable from that of co-accused Vibhor Singh, as the applicant is specifically named in the FIR, whereas Vibhor Singh is not. However, he was unable to refute the second statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., available at page 10 of the counter-affidavit, wherein an identical role has been attributed to both the applicant and co-accused Vibhor Singh. Upon consideration of the bail order of co-accused Vibhor Singh, the role assigned to the applicant in the complainant’s statements contained in the counter-affidavit, the fact that the applicant has satisfactorily explained the criminal antecedent of one case in paragraph 17 of the bail application, and noting that the charge sheet has already been filed and the applicant is in custody since 24.08.2025, this Court is of the view that a case for grant of bail is made out. Accordingly, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Mannu Singh, involved in Case Crime No.0055 of 2024 Under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, and 120-B IPC Act, Police Station Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow. be released on bail in the aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial Court. Any other condition(s) which the trial court/concerned court may deem fit and proper, in the circumstances of the case, may also be imposed. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial. November 26, 2025/R.C. BAIL No. 9911 of 2025 2 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench