Anand Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:38317

Court No. - 14

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 577 of 2025

Applicant :- Anand Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Misra,Aseem Samant Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Counter affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶7

The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No. 0879 of 2023, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471,120-B, 506 IPC, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Gonda.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶9

The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 27.05.2025 has passed the following order:-

¶10

"1. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party.

¶11

2. First anticipatory bail application has been filed with regard to case crime No. 0879 of 2023, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471,120-B, 506 IPC, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Gonda.

¶12

3. As per contents of F.I.R., allegation levelled is that although the informant's father passed away on 02.07.2003, a fabricated willdeed allegedly executed in favour of one Jamwanti, wife of Ram Chandra, was shown to have been executed on 02.07.2003 and was registered with connivance of registry officers on 25.10.2019 although the said Jamwanti had already passed away at that time.

¶13

4. It is submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in allegations levelled against him which would be evident from the fact that there is no role whatsoever indicated in the FIR with regard to applicant as entire gist of allegation has been made against the said Jamwanti in whose favour the alleged fabricated Will was executed. It is submitted that so far as applicant is concerned, only general allegations of having a role in the fabrication is alleged. It is submitted that investigation is still ongoing in which applicant undertakes to cooperate. The applicant has explained previous criminal history.

¶14

5. Learned A.G.A. has opposed bail application with submission that although the investigation is still ongoing but the applicant is

¶15

not cooperating in the same.

¶16

6. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and upon perusal of material on record, prima facie subject to evidence led in trial, it appears that the entire gist of allegation has been levelled against the said Jamwanti in whose favour the alleged fabricated Will was executed. There is no specific role assigned to applicant with regard to alleged forgery. The previous criminal history of the applicant has been explained. The applicant undertakes to cooperate in the investigation.

¶17

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and after perusal of the record, this Court finds it to be a fit case of interim anticipatory bail.

¶18

8. Let the accused-applicant Anand Kumar @ Annu as an interim measure be enlarged on anticipatory bail in view of the Constitution Bench judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98. The future contingencies regarding the anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶19

9. In the event of arrest, the accused-applicant shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on bail furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer/investigating officer/S.H.O. concerned on the following conditions:-

¶20

(i) That the accused-applicant shall cooperate in the investigation and he will not influence the witness. The accused-applicant will remain present as and when the arresting officer/I.O./S.H.O. concerned call(s) for investigation/interrogation. The applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court.

¶21

(ii) In case of default, it would be open for the investigating agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection.

¶22

10. Issue notice to respondent no.2.

¶23

11. List this case on 7th July, 2025 as fresh along with service report.

¶24

12. Objections may be filed in the meantime.

¶25

13. The applicant is directed to appear before the Investigation Officer on 30th May, 2025 at 2.00 P.M.

¶26

14. Learned A.G.A. shall obtain instructions by the next date of listing with regard to applicant's cooperation in the investigation."

¶27

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been released on interim anticipatory bail after filing of the personal bonds and two sureties before the investigating officer. He has duly cooperated in the investigation. Charge-sheet in the

¶28

case has already been filed. He has not misused the liberty of interim anticipatory bail granted by this Court. He undertakes to cooperate in the trial and in case, he is enlarged on anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of same.

¶29

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶30

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation so also the fact that chargesheet in the case has already been filed, the applicant has not misused the liberty of anticipatory bail granted by this Court coupled with the undertaking given by the applicant that he will cooperate in the trial as also the interim protection granted by this Court vide order dated 27.05.2025 is made absolute in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98.

¶31

The application stands allowed .

¶32

Order Date :- 7.7.2025 Shravan

¶33

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Anand Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anand Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mohd. Fayaz Ahmad @ Faizan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Mohit Maurya Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Mohd. Sahil Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Govt. Lko

Prem Kumar Bajpai Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Masrur Ahmad in Fir Masroof Ahmad @ Masrur Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Sectt. Lko

Chandan Dixit Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another