HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 7631 of 2025 Court No. - 72 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Thakur Prasad Dubey, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri B.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime no. 45 of 2025, under Sections 318(4), 324, 335, 336(3), 356, 338 and added Section 340(2) B.N.S., Police Station Chandpur, District Bijnor with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicants may be released on bail. 4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that applicants are innocent and they have an apprehension that they may be arrested in the above-mentioned case. He further submits that the present dispute is a civil dispute and the allegation is that the vendor of the alleged plot in dispute Mohd. Daud has executed a sale deed in excess of his share in favour of the applicants. It is further submitted that no offence against the applicants are made out. It is further submitted that the applicant no. 1 is having a criminal history of three cases and the applicant no. 2 is having criminal history of four cases and all of them have been explained in the supplementary affidavit filed today. It is also submitted that applicants undertake to cooperate during trial and they would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It is lastly submitted that in Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Thakur Prasad Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Usman Khan And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) case applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and they will cooperate with the investigation and would obey all conditions of bail. 5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for anticipatory bail, however, he does not dispute the factual aspect. 6. I have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. 7. As per first information report, the allegation is that one Mohd Daud executed a sale deed in excess of his share in favour of the applicants. The applicant no. 1 is having criminal history of three cases whereas the applicant no. 2 is having criminal history of four cases and all of them have been explained by the applicants in the supplementary affidavit. The applicants are not previous convicts. 8. It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694, it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, the Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration. 9. Considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicants and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out. 10. The anticipatory bail application is allowed. 11. In the event of arrest of the applicants- Usman Khan and Nawab Khan involved in the aforesaid case crime, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, with the following conditions :- NABAIL No. 7631 of 2025 2 (i) The applicants shall not tamper with evidence and that they would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court concerned; (ii) The applicants 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 him/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicants would cooperate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail. (iv) The applicants shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned. 12. In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants herein. October 8, 2025 Abhishek NABAIL No. 7631 of 2025 3 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad