Allowed

Nirmala v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC4 Jul 2025BAIL/6039/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: bail application allowed; forged will deed; property dispute between real sisters; Case Crime No.180 of 2022; sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 I.P.C.; FIR No.53 of 2022 (s.420 I.P.C.) by mother against informant; section 34 Revenue Code; Naib Tehsildar, Bijnour; R.T.I. disclosure re Sub Registrar-I S.B. Singh; P.S. Wazirganj, district Lucknow; no criminal history; woman/lady accused; cus

What did the court decide?

Applicant Nirmala to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions (i)-(vi) including non

Nirmala Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:37855

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6039 of 2025 Applicant :- Nirmala Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Alok Kr. Misra,Utkarsh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashok Kumar Bajpai,Belal Ahmad,Kadambani Lal,Nitesh Pandey,Satyendra Kumar Gupta

¶4

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶5

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Ashok Bajpai, Advocate who filed vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant which is taken on record, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.

¶6

2. It is alleged in the prosecution case that in order to usurp property of the informant's father late Horilal, the applicant Nirmala along with the co-accused prepared forged will deed on 11.12.2018 which was registered on 12.12.2018. From R.T.I., the informant came to know that the will was not registered and that does not contain signature of Sub Registrar-I S.B. Singh as he was already transferred on that date. It is further alleged that to usurp the property of late Horilal, the applicant instituted a case under section 34 of Revenue Code in the court of Naib Tehsildar, Bijnour where the court found the will to be forged and dismissed the case. Feeling aggrieved, the applicant along with the co-accused have threatened the informant.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that no forgery has been committed by the applicant. After the death of applicant's father, the property was mutated in the name of her mother. The dispute is between real sisters and a first information report No.53 of 2022 under section 420 I.P.C. was lodged against the informant and her son as well as the co-accused persons by none other than the mother of the informant for usurping her property by committing cheating.

¶8

It is submitted that taking advantage of illiteracy of the mother of the informant, the informant who is real sister of the applicant got executed a gift deed, thereby transferring the entire property of late father of the applicant in the name of the informant. Thus, a first information report under section 420 I.P.C. was lodged by mother of the informant as well as the applicant. The dispute is between real sisters regarding ancestral property of their father. The applicant has no previous criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 29.5.2025.

¶9

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, she shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

3. Learned A.G.A. and complainant's counsel vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

¶11

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, including the fact that the applicant has no criminal history, the applicant is a lady, first information report No.53 of 2022 under section 420 I.P.C. has been lodged against the informant by her mother, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the applicant is in jail since 29.5.2025, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am prima facie satisfied that it is a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. The bail application is accordingly allowed.

¶12

5. Let the applicant Nirmala, involved in Case Crime No.180 of 2022 under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Wazirganj, district Lucknow be released on bail on her furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶13

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶14

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶15

(iii) 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 officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶16

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶17

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against her under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

(vi) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

It is made clear that any observation(s) made in the present order shall not affect the trial.

¶20

Order Date :- 4.7.2025 kkb/

¶21

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

Nirmala v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nirmala v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ravindra Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

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

Aafak Ahamad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

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