HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10823 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record. 2. It is alleged in the prosecution case that the applicant, under a conspiracy with the co-accused persons, fraudulently got executed a sale deed on 26.04.2025 of the land of Chandra Kishore, in favour of the informant by introducing himself as an imposter Rajesh Singh in place of Chandra Kishore, on the basis of fake documents. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent. He is neither the executor of the sale deed nor the purchaser and nor the witness to the sale deed. The offences are triable by the Magistrate. He submits that he owner of the property i.e. Chandra Kishore has already got registered an F.I.R in connection with the same incident at police station Nigoha, District Lucknow, on similar allegations and the applicant cannot be prosecuted twice for the same offence. 4. He further submits that the co-accused persons namely Mahendra Yadav, having identical role, has been granted bail by Court of Sessions Judge, Lucknow in Bail Application No. 6616 of 2025, the bail order is annexed as Annexure No. 8 to the bail application. The applicant seeks parity with the bail order of the said co-accused. 5. It is further submitted that the applicant has criminal history of 6 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajesh Kumar Sharma, Prabhu Sharan Counsel for Opposite Party(s): G.A. Saurabh Patel .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko .....Opposite Party(s) cases which has been explained in paragraph- 35 of the bail application. 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. 6. Learned A.G.A.has opposed the prayer for bail, but he could not dispute that it is a case of parity. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the fact that the applicant is neither the seller, nor the purchaser nor the witness to the sale deed, the fact that co-accused Mahendra Yadav, who was assigned similar role, has been granted bail by Court of the Sessions Judge, Lucknow, the fact that criminal history of 6 cases against the applicant has been explained in paragraph-35 of the bail application, the fact that the offences are triable by the Magistrate as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 15.06.2025 and the chargesheet has been filed and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. 8. Let the applicant Saurabh Patel, involved in Case Crime No. 299 of 2025, under sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 319(2), 61(2) B.N.S, P.S. PGI, District Lucknow, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each 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 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. (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 BAIL No. 10823 of 2025 2 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 I.P.C. (now 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 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 I.P.C. (now 209 BNS). 9. The application is allowed on the ground of parity. November 10, 2025 DiVYa BAIL No. 10823 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench