HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1593 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No. 178/2025, under Sections 319(2)/318(4)/338/336(3)/340(2)/61(2)(a) of BNS, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Balrampur. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as Shri Anil Kumar Pandey, learned Advocate who has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant which is taken on record. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that the co-accused, Ram Kewal, executed a sale deed despite having the same name and parentage as that of the informant. It is further alleged that the complainant’s land was sold in favour of co-accused Anand Mishra, and the present applicant is stated to have signed the said sale deed as a witness. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the co-accused Balram, who was also a witness to the same sale deed, has already been granted anticipatory bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, as reflected in the order enclosed as Annexure No. 3 to the bail application. It is thus contended that the applicant deserves to be extended the benefit of parity. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Akhil Bajpai, Abhishek Agnihotri, Akshay Singh, Ambrish Kumar Dwivedi, Kuldeep Kaur, Madima Trivedi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Abhimanyu Yadav .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail application; however, they do not dispute the fact that the applicant’s role is limited to that of a witness to the sale deed. Perused the record. A perusal of the record shows that co-accused Balram, while being granted anticipatory bail, was found involved in 14 other criminal cases, whereas the present applicant has no criminal antecedents. The Court, therefore, finds that the applicant’s case stands on a better footing than that of co-accused Balram. Considering the observations made hereinabove, the fact that the alleged offences are triable by a Magistrate, and taking into account the undertaking given by the applicant to cooperate in the investigation, this Court is of the considered opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in light of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sushila Aggarwal and Others vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and Another, (2020) 5 SCC 1, subject to his continued cooperation in the investigation. In view of the above, it is provided that in the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid Case Crime number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/S.H.O. concerned with the following conditions:- The applicant shall report to the investigating officer within twenty days from today. He shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witness. The accused-applicant will remain present as and when the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned call(s) for investigation/interrogation. The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court. The application is allowed. October 28, 2025 R.C. NABAIL No. 1593 of 2025 2 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench