HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10186 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. The present application has been filed by the accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.165 of 2025 under sections 409, 420, 120B I.P.C./316(5), 318(4), 61(2) BNS, P.S. Mohanlalganj, district Lucknow. It is alleged in the prosecution case that the informant had purchased a residential plot from H.K. Infra vision Pvt. Lted. in his name on a consideration sum of Rs.19,80,000/- and a registered sale deed was executed on 20.4.2022. However, three years have passed, till date, possession of the plot has not been given nor the money taken by the accused applicant has been returned to the informant. therefore, it appears that on the basis of forged documents, registered sale deed has been executed in favour of the informant. It is further alleged that the co- accused Vinod Kumar Upadhyay gave three cheques to the informant which have been dishonoured. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the dispute primarily is of a civil nature. It is contended that the grievance of the complainant is that despite execution of the sale deed, possession of the property has not been handed over to him. It is further submitted that no civil suit has been instituted by the complainant in respect of the said dispute. The offence alleged is triable by a Magistrate, and the applicant has been languishing in jail since 10.07.2025. It is further submitted that co-accued Pramod Kumar Upadhyay has been Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Virendra Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Madan Ram .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) granted bail by this court vide order dated 23.9.2025 passed in cri. Misc. Bail Application No.8776 of 2025. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant had served as Additional Director during the period 2015 to 2017. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as perused the record. Perusal of the F.I.R. shows that the consideration amount was paid during the period 2019 to 2021. On due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is evident that the offence alleged is triable by a Magistrate; the dispute primarily appears to be civil in nature; and no civil suit appears to have been instituted in respect of the same; the applicant has been in jail since 10.07.2025; and the co-accused, namely Pramod Kumar Upadhyay, has already been granted bail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for being enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Madan Ram be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below concerned with the following conditions: (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) 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. BAIL No. 10186 of 2025 2 (iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the IPC (now Section 269 BNS). (vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now Section 84 BNSS)is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the IPC (now Section 209 BNS). 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 6, 2025 Madhu D.R/P.S BAIL No. 10186 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench