HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1228 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant and learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State. 2. The instant application has been filed by the applicant seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R./Case Crime No.122 of 2023 under Sections 419/467/468/471 of I.P.C. registered at Police Station- Kotwali Nanpara, District- Bahraich. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 12.03.2023 against five persons, including the applicant, stating that the complainant had purchased a land in the year 1956. A long litigation continued regarding the property dispute between the complainant and the accused persons Udayveer, Krishna Kumar and Santosh Kumar, who lost the case finally in the year 2018. In the year 2020, the aforesaid accused persons executed a power of attorney in favour of the applicant on the basis whereof the applicant filed a case in the Board of Revenue, Prayagraj in the year 2021. The accused persons forged a compromise deed containing forged signatures of the complainant also. 4. After investigation, initially the Investigating Officer has submitted a closure report but a protest application filed by the complainant was accepted and further investigation was conducted which is still pending. 5. The applicant's involvement in another case has been disclosed in para 41 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. It is further submitted that co-accused persons namely Furkan, Ajay and Jahid Ali have been granted anticipatory bail by coordinate Bench of this court and Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ratnesh Singh, Pranav Mishra, Rahul Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Krishna Kumar Sahu .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Sectt. Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) by this court vide orders dated 25.9.2025, 15.10.2025 and 16.10.2025 respectively. The applicant seeks parity with the anticipatory bail orders of the said co accused persons. 6. The learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and he has submitted that the applicant is repetitively misusing the power of attorney executed by three accused persons in his favour. 7. Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the anticipatory bail application and submitted that further investigation in the present case is still going on. 8. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, anticipatory bail orders of the co-accused persons named above and keeping in view the fact that even as per the FIR version, some litigation of civil nature is pending between the complainant and other three accused persons who have executed the power of attorney in favour of the applicant; the genuineness of the documents is already a question that is subjudice which is pending between the parties and that after initial investigation, a closure report has been submitted by the Investigating Officer, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for granting anticipatory bail to the applicant. 9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed on the ground of parity. In the event of arrest/ appearance of applicant before the learned Trial Court in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on bail on furnishing a 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 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 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 ABAIL No. 1228 of 2025 2 fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. November 7, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S ABAIL No. 1228 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench