Anticipatory bail dismissed where applicants removed demarcation pillars after failed legal challenges; typographical error in case diary date does not invalidate demarcation proceedings supported by revenue records and police diary.
Anticipatory bail application rejected ¶¶23
A mere typographical error in the case diary recording the demarcation date as 23/6/2025 instead of 23/5/2025 does not negate the fact that demarcation proceedings were conducted on 23/5/2025, as evidenced by the Tehsildar's order dated 25/4/2025, the report dated 24/5/2025, and the police station daily diary entry No. 30 dated 23/5/2025. ¶¶14
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1091 of 2025
Vijay Kumar Mishra @ Vijay Kumar And 7 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shanker Lal Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 13
HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J.
NABAIL No. 1091 of 2025
2
संलग्न की गई है, िजसके माध्यम से पत्थर नसब (सीमांकन) की कायर्वाही के िलए एक पाँच सदस्यीय लेखपालों की टीम गिठत की गई। िदनांक 24/5/2025 को एक आख्या तहसीलदार के समक्ष प्रस्तुत की गई, िजसमें अंिकत है िक िदनांक 23/05/2025 को पुिलस बल के साथ एवं ग्रामवािसयों की उपिस्थित में पत्थर नसब (सीमांकन) की कायर्वाही की गई। िदनांक 26/5/2025 को लेखपाल ने एक आख्या प्रस्तुत कर के बताया िक िदनांक 23/5/2025 को िनयमानुसार पत्थर नसब (सीमांकन) व मेड़बंदी कराई गई थी, िकन्तु िवपिक्षयों द्वारा िपलर को उखाड़कर फेंक िदया गया तथा मेड़ों को पूणर् रूप से क्षितग्रस्त कर िदया गया। इसके पश्चात पीिड़त व्यिक्त ने यह प्रथम सूचना िरपोटर् अंिकत कराई है। घटना में पत्थर नसब (सीमांकन) की कायर्वाही के संबंध में, पुिलस बल के जाने के संबंध में थाने के सामान्य दैिनकी में पचार् संख्या 30 में िदनांक 23/5/2025 को पुिलस बल की रवानगी का तथ्य अंिकत है।
(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.)
September 1, 2025 Himanshu
Digitally signed by :- HIMANSHU SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
3 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicants in FIR No. 0183/2025 under Sections 191(2)/119(1)/131/351(3) BNS¶¶11
A mere typographical error in the case diary recording the demarcation date as 23/6/2025 instead of 23/5/2025 does not negate the fact that demarcation proceedings were conducted on 23/5/2025, as evidenced by the Tehsildar's order dated 25/4/2025, the report dated 24/5/2025, and the police station daily diary entry No. 30 dated 23/5/2025.ratio¶¶14
Whether the typing error in the case diary (recording demarcation date as 23/6/2025 instead of 23/5/2025) invalidates the demarcation proceedings¶¶14
The applicants' challenges to the demarcation and bunding orders having failed, their subsequent act of removing the pillars and damaging the bunds appears to be out of frustration, which led to the registration of the FIR.ratio¶¶21
Whether the applicants' conduct in removing demarcation pillars and damaging bunds after their legal challenges failed disentitles them to anticipatory bail¶¶21
2 provisions across 2 enactments
How this case reached the court
FIR No. 0183 of 2025 under Sections 191(2)/119(1)/131/351(3) BNS, Police Station Antu, District Pratapgarh¶¶11
Police Station Antu, District Pratapgarh · 4/6/2025
Civil suit No. 3548 of 2018 (Arjun Prasad vs State etc.) regarding demarcation (patthar nasb); restoration application dismissed on 11/07/2023; appeal allowed and remanded to SDM; restoration application again dismissed on 05/12/2025¶¶19
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
