HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10256 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. 2. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that a cheque of Rs. 2 lakhs was given by the complainant in the name of the father of the applicant and a cheque of Rs. 2 lakhs was given in the name of the mother of the applicant. An amount of Rs. 50,000/- was further required for the execution of sale deed of 2 bigha land in favour of the complainant. However, on the date of execution of the sale deed, Rs. 50,000/- fell short, so the father of the applicant executed the sale deed of only one bigha of land. On the next date, Rs. 50,000/- cash was given to Moharram Ali, but he refused to execute the sale deed in favour of the complainant. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are the real brothers. They are neither the seller nor the purchaser of the property. They have not received any amount in their account. The co-accused Rabia, who has received the consideration amount in her account, has been granted bail by the co-ordinate bench of this court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 106 of 2024 vide order dated 05.01.2024, the bail order is annexed as Annexure No. 6 to the bail application. 4. It is further submitted that the applicant filed a suit for cancellation of sale deed as well as for permanent injunction, the memo of the suit is on record. After filing of that suit, the present F.I.R has been registered which clearly show that the dispute is purely civil in nature. 5. It is further submitted that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 03.10.2025. There is no possibility of the applicants fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arvind Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sami Ahmad And Another .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) witnesses. In case the applicants are enlarged on bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail. 6. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail, but he could not dispute the fact that it is a case of parity. 7. Considering facts and circumstances of the case, the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the nature of allegations levelled against the applicants, prima facie, the dispute appears to be purely civil in nature, the fact that applicants have no previous criminal history and are languishing in jail since 03.10.2025, the fact that co-accused Rabia has been granted bail by the co-ordinate bench of this court, this Court finds it to be a fit case for granting bail to the applicants. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicants Sami Ahmad and Nanbabu @ Chandbabu, involved in Case Crime/FIR No. 697 of 2022, Under Sections- 419, 420, 406, 504 and 506, Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District- Gonda, be released on bail on their furnishing separate personal bonds and two sureties each separately in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicants will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicants will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicants 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. (iv) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against them in accordance with law. (vi) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now Section BAIL No. 10256 of 2025 2 84 BNSS) is issued and the applicants fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law under Section 174-A IPC (now Section 209 of BNS). 10. 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 10, 2025 DiVYa BAIL No. 10256 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench