HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4588 of 2026 Court No. - 68 HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J. Heard Shri Devaang Savla, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Yagyavalk Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the records. The instant bail application seeks enlargement on bail of the applicant, Sundar Kumar, in Case Crime No. 562 of 2025, under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) of B.N.S., Police Station-Baghpat, District Baghpat during the pendency of the trial before the court below. The bail application of the applicant before the court below was rejected by learned Sessions Judge, Baghpat vide order dated 28.11.2025 and the applicant is languishing in jail since 03.10.2025. Learned counsel for the applicant vehemently argues that the applicant is entirely innocent and has been falsely implicated in this very case for ulterior motives. The F.I.R. giving rise to the case crime number in question has been lodged nominating as many as seven persons including the applicant herein with allegation that the applicant executed a forged sale deed of Khasra Plot No. 111, situate at village Sisana Bangar, District Baghpat in favour of the opposite party no. 2 and two others persons namely Renu Gupta D/o Rajiv Gupta and Harish Sharma s/o Vijay Pal Sharma pretending himself to be the legal heir of one Anil Kumar Agarwal s/o Data Ram by forging legal heir certificate, Adhar Card and Death Certificate. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Akash Tyagi, Ambleshwar Pandey, Anuj Srivastava, Devaang Savla, Neha Tyagi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sundar Kumar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) Learned counsel for the applicant has vehemently argued that there is inordinate and unexplained delay of about four months, which casts a shadow of doubt over the entire prosecution story. The main accused is Ravindra Kumar. The dispute in the present case is purely civil in nature and has been given a criminal colour. No offence u/s 318(4), 338, 336(3), 340(2), 61(2) of B.N.S. is made out against the applicant. It is next argued that charge-sheet against the applicant has already been filed on 25.11.2025, while the investigation against co-accused Mahendra @ Munendra s/o Bheem Singh, Vikas @ Mayank s/o Azad, Ravindra s/o Akram, Pramod s/o Raishpal and Halka Lekhpal, is still going on. It is next argued that the applicant has been illegally arrested by the police in contravention and violation of the provisions of Section 47 of B.N.S.S. as well as Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India. Reliance has been placed upon the decision of the Apex Court in Vihaan Kumar Vs. State of Haryana and Others, reported in 2025 (5) SCC 799. It is accordingly argued that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail plea by submitting that applicant is guilty of acting as an imposter claiming to be the heir and legal representative of Anil Kumar Agarwal, whose land has been illegally sold. Investigation reveals that the sale proceeds were credited into the HDFC Bank account of the applicant. It has been submitted that bail plea of the applicant warrants outright rejection. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have given my respective consideration to the submissions advanced. I find that prima facie the applicant appears to be the principal offender as the sale deed has been executed by him on the strength of forged and fabricated documents. In the ultimate conclusion, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, gravity of the offence, severity of punishment, in my opinion, no case for bail is made out. Accordingly, the bail application is hereby rejected. April 1, 2026 Vibha Singh BAIL No. 4588 of 2026 2 (Ashutosh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIBHA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad