Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:122327 Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22065 of 2025 Applicant :- Mobeen Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Waseem Counsel for Opposite Party :- Ajay Kumar Srivastava,G.A. Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant and perused the material brought on record. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that it is alleged in the FIR that earlier the informant purchased land in the year 2011 from one Jay Prakash @ Jagdish through registered agreement to sell upon which he developing a colony. In the meanwhile the two co-accused Anju Gangwar and Manju Gangwar prepared forged agreement to sell dated 31.12.2010, against which the informant lodged the FIR on 16.01.2011 against aforesaid two co-accused. On 17.10.2022 the present applicant and persons reached at the land of the informant and while threatening the guard asked to inform the informant to pay eighty lakh rupees to them. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that there is no specific allegation against the applicant and whatever has been stated that has been stated against the co-accused Anju Gangwar and Manju Gangwar. There is no evidence against the applicant except the allegations made in the F.I.R. There is no independent witness of the alleged occurrence. 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. The applicant has a criminal history of one case in which he is on bail. He next submits that the applicant is in jail since 04.05.2025. 3. Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have 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-Mobeen, be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 675 of 2022, under Sections 323, 506, 427, 420, 147, 467, 468, 471, 384, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station- Bhojipura, District- Bareilly, 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 :- 24.7.2025 Mustaqeem. Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad