Khurshid vs State of U.P.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 6869 of 2025

Khurshid	Versus ..	...Applicant(s)
State of U.P.		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Ajai Kumar, Chandrabhan : Rajesh Kumar Sharma, G.A.	Shobh Nath,

¶4

Court No. - 69

¶5

HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shobh Nath, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶7

This application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 144 of 2024, under Sections 419, 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Raipur, District Sonbhadra.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant is the bonafide purchaser of the land in dispute. The sale deed was executed by the co-accused Haricharan in favour of the applicant and co-accused Nazibuddin and Amiruddin on 25.06.2024. The stamp duty as well as sale consideration was duly paid. The informant has already instituted a civil suit numbered as Suit No. 622 of 2024 (Bande Hasan and another Vs. Amiruddin and others) in the Court of Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Robertsganj, Sonbhadra, which is still pending. The case is purely civil in nature. The opposite party no.2 has attempted to cloak it with a criminal flavour to harass the applicant. Further, the applicant has no criminal antecedents. The investigation is going on and the applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. and the counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid

¶10

NABAIL No. 6869 of 2025

¶11

2

¶12

submissions from the record.

¶13

Having regard to the submissions made, considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of the applicant, in particular the fact, that the applicant is the purchaser of the land in dispute; the sale deed was executed by the co-accused Haricharan in favour applicant and co-accused Nazibuddin and Amiruddin on 25.06.2024; the case is purely civil in nature, civil suit between the parties is also pending before the court of competent jurisdiction, at this stage, there is no substantive evidence to link the applicant with the offence, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled for anticipatory bail.

¶14

In the event of arrest, the applicant Khurshid involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶15

(i) The applicant shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation;

¶16

(ii) 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 from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer;

¶17

(iii) The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.

¶18

(iv) The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.

¶19

(v) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court.

¶20

(vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 B.N.S.S.

¶21

NABAIL No. 6869 of 2025

¶22

3

¶23