HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44315 of 2025 Court No. - 66 HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J. 1. Heard Miss. Afshan Shafaut, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Satyam Narayan, learned counsel for informant and Sri Vijay Kumar, learned AGA for the State. 2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 370 of 2025, under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) B.N.S., Police Station Partapur, District Meerut, during pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, however, as per allegation applicant fraudulently executed sale deed of the property relating to informant and his brother in favour of his son Hareesh but entire allegation levelled against the applicant are totally false. 4. She next submits actually property in question was having number of co-sharers and one such co-sharer was Badlu and he transferred the property in favour of one Ajay and thereafter Ajay executed power of attorney in favour of applicant and thereafter applicant executed sale deed in favour of his son Hareesh. 5. She further submits even with regard to the property in question son of the applicant Hareesh Yadav along with two others filed a civil suit of permanent injunction against brother of the informant and four others and when his application under Section 6-C was dismissed then he came before this Court in matter under Article 227 No. 15280 of 2025 and this Court indulged into the matter and notices were issued to brother of the informant and others and respondents were restrained from demolishing the property in question. She placed the order dated 10.12.2025 passed by this Court in the above application filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 6. She next submits, prima facie, present dispute appears to be civil Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Afshan Shafaut, Diwakar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Satyam Narayan Vikram Singh Yadav .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) dispute and as even with regard to the property in question a civil suit for permanent injunction is pending, therefore, there is no occasion to detain the applicant further in the matter. 7. She further submits that even all the offences are triable by Magistrate. 8. She further argued, applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter, he is in jail since 6.11.2025 i.e. for last six months. 9. Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submit that applicant with fraudulent intention executed sale deed of the property in question in favour of his son and though a suit for permanent injunction filed by the son of the applicant is pending but merely on this ground it is not proper to release the applicant on bail. 10. They further submit, therefore, considering the alleged fraud and cheating committed by applicant the instant bail application may be dismissed. 11. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 12. The present dispute relates to a property and as per allegation applicant without authority by playing fraud executed sale deed of the property in question in favour of his son but it reflects with regard to the property in question which is situated in the same Khata No. 00164 and 149/1 son of the applicant and two others filed a civil suit for permanent injunction against brother of the informant and two others and that civil suit is still pending. Record further suggests that when application under Section 6-C moved by the applicant was dismissed by the court concerned then applicant approached this Court and this Court on 10.02.2025 was pleased to issue notice to brother of the informant and others and restrained them from demolishing the property in question till the next date of listing. 13. Considering the above fact, prima facie, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that present dispute appears to be civil dispute cannot be ruled out at this stage. 14. Further, however, applicant apart from the present case also has a criminal history of one another case, as informed by learned A.G.A. but admittedly that relates to minor offences under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC. 15. Further all offences are triable by Magistrate and applicant is in jail for last more than six months. BAIL No. 44315 of 2025 2 16. Further law is settled, bail is a rule while jail is an exception and bail should not be dismissed either for preventive or punitive purpose. 17. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 18. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 19. Let the applicant -Vikram Singh Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 20. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 21. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. May 7, 2026 Kumar Manish BAIL No. 44315 of 2025 3 (Sameer Jain,J.) Digitally signed by :- MANISH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad