HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 10297 of 2026 Court No. - 71 HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard Learned counsel for the applicant and Learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record. 2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime no.237 of 2025, under section 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station- Chaubia, District-Etawah, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as the applicant apprehends his arrest in the abovementioned case. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant at the relevant point of time was the Lekhpal. The allegations are of the co-accused Indrapal getting his name mutated in the revenue records on the basis of an order dated 23.07.2003 passed by the Assistant Consolidation Officer. Learned counsel has submitted that the F.I.R. has been lodged after 22 years of the occurrence on 28.12.2025. Co-accused Indrapal Singh Yadav has been granted regular bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.8398 of 2026. The applicant is still working as Lekhpal. The applicant has a criminal history of three cases; in one case the applicant has been granted bail by this Court, in another case the applicant is on interim bail under the orders of this Court and in Case Crime No.317 of 2018 a final report has been submitted and the protest petition filed by the informant has also been dismissed. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pankaj Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Rahish Pal .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but does not dispute the explanation given by the applicant of his criminal history. Learned A.G.A. has stated that the entries in the revenue records were made on the basis of a fake sale deed. The applicant being the Lekhpal at the relevant point of time was one of the key persons in the said forgery. Learned counsel has further submitted that the applicant has three other cases to his credit of like nature which indicate the propensity of the applicant to repeat such crimes and he may not be considered for grant of anticipatory bail. 5. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsels for the parties. 6. The applicant is not the beneficiary of the alleged forged entries supposedly obtained on the basis of a fake sale deed. The FIR has been lodged with an excessive delay of 22 years. Co-accused Indrapal Singh Yadav has been granted regular bail by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.8398 of 2026. The criminal history of the applicant has been duly explained. 7. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to enlarge applicant on anticipatory bail. 8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is allowed. 9. In the event of the arrest of the applicant-Rahish Pal, he shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station/Court concerned with the following conditions:- i. the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; ii. that 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police NABAIL No. 10297 of 2026 2 officer; iii. that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court; iv. that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness; 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel the bail. 11. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and are not to be considered to be an opinion on the merits of the case. October 1, 2026 A. Pandey NABAIL No. 10297 of 2026 3 (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANAND PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad