HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 9641 of 2026 Court No. - 71 HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J. 1. Heard, Learned counsel for the applicants, the Learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants in Case Crime No. 25 of 2026, under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 351(3) of BNS, Police Station- Bansdih, District Ballia, with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail as the applicants apprehend their arrest in the above-mentioned case. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants has contended that the applicants are stated to be marginal witnesses of a registered will deed executed by one Purnawasi in favour of late Rajkumari Devi. The applicants are not the beneficiaries of the will deed in question, they have no role to play in the alleged fraud. The applicants have no criminal history. 4. The Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail, but does not dispute that the applicants are merely marginal witnesses of the will deed in question. 6. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsel for the parties and perused the material brought on the record. 7. From the material on record, it appears that a registered will deed was supposedly executed by one Purnawasi in favour of Rajkumari Devi, but Rajkumari Devi died before Purnawasi. The allegation is that concealing this fact the heirs of late Rajkumari Devi got their names mutated over the property in belonging to Purnawasi, which under the law would have gone to the legal heirs of late Purnawasi as the will deed in question has become ineffective. In the prima facie opinion of the Court, the applicants who are merely marginal witnesses of the said registered will deed and are not beneficiaries of the will deed in question, have made out a case for grant of Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Virendra Pratap Pal Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Dinesh Yadav And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) anticipatory bail. The applicants have no criminal history. 8. Taking into account all the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I deem it fit to enlarge the applicants on anticipatory bail. 9. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants is allowed. 10. In the event of the arrest of the applicants -Dinesh Yadav and Tuntun, they shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond and surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station/Court concerned with the following conditions:- i. the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; ii. that 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; iii. that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court; iv. that the applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness; 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel the bail. 12. 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. September 30, 2026 Sartaj NABAIL No. 9641 of 2026 2 (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.) Digitally signed by :- SARTAJ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad