Dismissed¶13

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

Allahabad HC3 Jul 2025NABAIL/804/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench (Neutral Citation 2025:AHC-LKO:37546), anticipatory bail application under Section 482 BNSS rejected in Case Crime No. 458 of 2024, Sections 419/420/467/468/471 IPC, PS Mohanlalganj, Lucknow South; impersonation and forged/fraudulent sale deeds dated 09.11.2022 and 29.09.2023; applicant Aafak Ahamad was marginal witness to both deeds; gravity of offence and witness role weighed against bail; single judge Karunesh Singh Pawar, J.; order dated 3.7.2025.

What did the court decide?

In view of the gravity of the offence and the manner in which the sale deeds were executed by impersonating the real owners, the Court was not inclined to grant anticipatory bail. ¶12

Aafak Ahamad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:37546

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 804 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Aafak Ahamad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State, and perused the material available on record.

¶7

The present application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 458 of 2024, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, Police Station Mohanlalganj, District Lucknow South (Commissionerate Lucknow).

¶8

As per the prosecution case, the complainant Raj Kumar Verma and Smt. Manju Verma are the owners of agricultural land bearing Gata Nos. 1823Ka, 1822, 1855, and 1821Ka. It is alleged that the said land was fraudulently sold to three purchasers through two sale deeds executed on 29.09.2023 and 09.11.2022 by introducing imposters in place of the actual owners. Co-accused Raj Kumar Mishra is alleged to have impersonated informant Raj Kumar Verma, and his wife Reena Mishra impersonated Smt. Manju Verma. Based on such impersonation, the impugned sale deeds were executed. The applicant is stated to be a marginal witness in both sale deeds.

¶9

It has been submitted on behalf of the applicant that he is neither the purchaser nor the seller nor a beneficiary of the said transactions. He claims to have been falsely implicated and states that he was working as a helper with one Vijay

¶10

Kumar, a typist at the registry office in Mohanlalganj, and he became a witness to the sale deeds in good faith.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that the alleged offence is of a serious nature, and the presence of the applicant as a witness in both fraudulent sale deeds cannot be treated as mere coincidence. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record.

¶12

In view of the gravity of the offence and the manner in which the sale deeds were executed by impersonating the real owners, and further considering that the applicant is a witness in both sale deeds where alleged forgery has taken place, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant.

¶13

Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application is rejected .

¶14

Order Date :- 3.7.2025

¶15

Madhu D.R/P.S

¶16

Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Pappu @ Pappu Shankar and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Bablu @ Basant Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Shah Alam Alias Dhoni Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

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

Savitri Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deppt. of Home Lko. and Another