HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34479 of 2026 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Nagendra Kumar Mishra, learned Brief Holder for the State-opposite party and perused the record. 2. The instant bail application, under Section 483 B.N.S.S., has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 301 of 2025, under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) B.N.S. and Section 3/5 Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, Police Station- Kotwali, District- Kanpur Nagar, during the pendency of trial. 3. Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. By virtue of a transfer deed dated 20.12.1956, the land in question was transferred by "The Women's Union Missionary Society, USA" in favour of "Christian Mission to the Amritsar Diocesan Trust Association". The applicant is the secretary of the said Association. Thereafter, the land in question remained in the possession of the applicant's trust. The District Magistrate, Kanpur by way of ex-parte proceeding passed an order dated 06.08.2024, whereby the property in question was declared as nazul land. It is contended that the dispute is purely civil in nature. The applicant has neither forged nor manipulated any document. At this stage, there is no corroborative evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The applicant is in jail since 20.05.2026 having no criminal antecedents and in case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 4. Learned Brief Holder for the State has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 5. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record this Court prima facie finds that the dispute is purely civil in nature. At this Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Priti Verma, Siya Ram Verma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Rev Deepak Kumar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) stage, there is no corroborative evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Moreover, the applicant has no criminal antecedents and has remained confined for more than four months and after submission of charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, and no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 6. Let the applicant- Rev Deepak Kumar, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned subject to the conditions that he: (i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; (ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and, (iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses. 7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. September 28, 2026 Abhishek BAIL No. 34479 of 2026 2 (Vivek Varma, J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad