Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:69648 Court No. - 67 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8942 of 2025 Applicant :- Faheem Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Saurabh Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- Deepak Dubey,G.A.,Hasan Parvej Hon'ble Chandra Dhari Singh,J. 1. Instant application filed on behalf of applicant Faheem under Section 483 of B.N.S.S seeking bail in Case Crime No. 43 of 2020, under Sections 195, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Mahila Thana, District Bareilly (U.P.). 2. Ms. Geeta Luthra, learned Senior Counsel appearing virtually on behalf of the applicant submitted that the instant F.I.R. was lodged on 06.08.2020 by the informant against the applicant under Sections 195, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C. Learned Senior Counsel further submitted that according to the alleged version of first information report, the husband i.e. informant has poured acid on his own son and for establishing this fact the informant has placed certain medical documents. It is further alleged that the said documents placed before the Investigating Agency by the applicant has been verified and found false and fabricated, only to falsely implicate in that case (F.I.R. No. 50 of 2019) to the informant herein. Learned Senior Counsel vehemently submitted that there are no intention or reason to place any forged and fabricated medical report to the Investigating Agency but she had a believe that the said medical report which has been given on behalf of the injured was genuine. Therefore, it is vehemently submitted that said first information report has been lodged only to harass the applicant and to implicate him in a false case with ulterior motive. It is also submitted that therefore, the allegations levelled against the applicant are malicious, baseless, bogus and false in nature. It is vehemently submitted that applicant has moved to this High Court by way of filing application/petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing the entire proceedings and after hearing the said application/petition, the co-ordinate Bench of this Court has granted stay on the proceedings qua the applicant vide order dated 24.01.2025 but prior to that he was arrested on 11.01.2025. It is also submitted that as per F.S.L. report the hand writing of the doctor on the prescription which has been submitted by the applicant to the Investigating Agency, there are no tampering in the said medical documents. It is submitted that as per F.S.L. report no case is made out against the applicant for the offence punishable under Sections 195, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of applicant submitted that matrimonial disputes are going on between the applicant and complainant and other multiple litigations are going on in different Courts. At last Ms. Geeta Luthra, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of applicant informed the Court that the parties have reached on the settlement of the matter and settled all the disputes pending between the parteis. 3. Shri Ankit Shukla, Advocate who is assisting Ms. Geeta Luthra, learned Senior Counsel has handed over photocopy of no objection affidavit as well as copy of the settlement agreement/ memorandum of undertaking, which have been placed before this Court and are taken on record. 4. Learned Senior Counsel further submitted that in pursuance of the said Memorandum of undertaking as the parties have already settled the matter, taking into consideration of the terms and conditions as contained in the memorandum, this Court may release the applicant on bail. It is also undertaken on the instructions that applicant shall abide by all terms and conditions as imposed by this Court while granting bail. 5. Shri Deepak Dubey appearing on behalf of the informant vehemently opposed the instant bail application on merits but since matter has already been compromised and parties have settled their disputes, therefore, he is not opposing the instant bail application. 6. Sri S. K. Ojha, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of State vehemently opposed the instant bail application. 7. Heard Ms. Geeta Luthra, learned Senior Counsel appearing virtually on behalf of applicant, Shri S. K. Ojha, learned A.G.A. for the State and Shri Deepak Dubey, learned counsel appearing for the informant and perused the contents made in the first information report as well as material placed on record. 8. Since parties have already compromised the matter and learned counsel appearing on behalf of complainant did not oppose the instant bail application and also taking into consideration that matter relates to the matrimonial dispute, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant- Faheem, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.1,00000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence. (ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Order Date :- 2.5.2025/AKT (Chandra Dhari Singh, J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad