Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:68756 Court No. - 86 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 56001 of 2023 Applicant :- Jugendra Singh Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Praveen Kumar Singh,Syed Imran Ibrahim Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J. 1. Heard Shri Sameer Srivastava, Advocate, holding brief of Shri Kamlakar Pal, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Amit Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is the sole accused who is named in the F.I.R. The allegation is that applicant had purchased the land at Gata No. 110-Sa/0.934 hectare and Gata No. 1045/0162 hectare and got mutated his name in the revenue records by tampering in Khatauni. The seller of the said land has not been made accused in the F.I.R. Learned counsel further submits that the aforesaid land was purchased by the applicant through a sale deed executed on 20.02.1998. After purchasing the land the applicant got mutated his name in Khatauni. Learned counsel further submits that as far as the allegation of tampering is concerned there is no material on record to show that tampering was done by the applicant. Furthermore, in pursuance of the aforesaid sale deed the name of applicant was mutated in revenue records, which was challenged before the Sub Divisional Magistrate concerned who vide order dated 18.08.2000 directed that the said land be mutated in the name of Gaon Sabha. That order was challenged before the Prescribed Authority, who vide order dated 06.04.2015 passed the order in favour of the applicant, which order has not been challenged before any court of law and thus had attained finality. Learned counsel further submits that no application for cancellation of the said sale deed had been filed by any of the parties and moreover, the order of the Prescribed Authority has not been challenged, therefore it had become final. Thus, it has been argued that, at this stage there is no evidence at all against the applicant. Rest of the allegations will be seen and examined at the trial. As to the criminal history of the applicant, that has been explained satisfactorily. 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 05.07.2023. 3. Learned A.G.A. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but he has not disputed the above submissions made on behalf of applicant. 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-Jugendra Singh Yadav, be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 142 of 2023, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station- Bhagwala, District Etah, 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 :- 1.5.2025 Mustaqeem. Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad