Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:134829 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10438 of 2025 Applicant :- Ravi Babu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Abhilasha Singh,Ashutosh Yadav,Mohammad Danish,Shyam Lal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the F.I.R. was lodged against the applicant and seven other accused. The allegation made in the F.I.R. is that all the accused cheated the informant to the tune of Rs. 13,44,000/- by executing forged sale deed. Learned counsel further submits that there is specific allegation against the co-accused, Aakash. Learned counsel further submits that at C.D.-8 the statement of Registrar is recorded wherein he has specifically stated that in the alleged sale deed the applicant was a witness and the deed writer was Advocate Nagendra Kumar, who identified photographs of the parties. Learned counsel further submits that the main accused Aakash is in jail while against one other accused Advocate Nagendra Kumar the investigation is going on. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that the applicant is in jail since 11.02.2025, with no criminal history. 3. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. 4. Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence and without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed. 5. Let the applicant-Ravi Babu, be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 683 of 2024, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 34 I.P.C., Police Station- Bahjoi, District- Sambhal, on executing a personal bond and furnishing two local sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions: i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence. ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court. iv) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission. v) 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. 6. In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of applicant in accordance with law. Order Date :- 8.8.2025 Mustaqeem. Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad