HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 8075 of 2025 Court No. - 72 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Heard Sri Prashant Rai, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri B.P. Maurya, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 0138 of 2025, under Sections 420, 406, 506, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Fatehpur, District Saharanpur with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail. 3. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that no offence is made out against the applicant as he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that as per first information report allegation is that the applicant and other co-accused person induced the first informant to purchase the plot and consideration money of Rs. 6,69,648/- was fixed, out of which the applicant and another co-accused received Rs. 5,70,000/- in total on different dates from the first informant but they did not either return the money or get the plot registered in her name. He further submits that as per FIR amount has been given on different dates from the years 2021 and 2023 and first information report has been lodged in the year 2024. It is further submitted that the applicant is having no criminal history. It was also submitted that applicant undertakes to co-operate during trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. 4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail. 5. I have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Prashant Rai Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Mohammad Nazim .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 6. As per first information report allegation is that the applicant along with co-accused persons induced the first informant to purchase the plot and received Rs. 5,70,000/- on different dates and they did not return the money nor did they get the plot registered in favour of the first informant. The dates of alleged payment are of the years 2021 and 2022 whereas FIR has been lodged in the year 2024. The applicant is having no criminal history. 7. It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, the Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration. 8. In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out. 9. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. 10. In the event of arrest of the applicant- Mohammad Nazim involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, with the following conditions :- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence and that he would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court concerned; (ii) 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/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicant would co-operate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail. (iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned. 11. In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant. October 7, 2025 Abhishek NABAIL No. 8075 of 2025 2 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad