Nutan Thakur Vs State of Up and Another

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2007 of 2026

Nutan Thakur		.....Applicant(s)
	Versus
State of U.P. and Another		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)		: Vineet Vikram
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)		: G.A.

¶4

Court No. - 72

¶5

HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

¶6

Heard Shri Imran Ulla Siddiqui, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Vineet Vikram, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Paaritosh Kumar Malviya, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the records.

¶7

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 1021 of 2025, U/s 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC P.S. Kotwali, District-Deoria, with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

¶8

It is contended by the learned Senior Counsel for the applicant that the incident relates to the year 1999 and the first information report has been lodged in the year 2025 i.e. after 26 years. It is further submitted that as per allegation, the applicant was allotted a plot in the year 1999, in which, her name has been mentioned as 'Nutan Devi' in place of her actual name 'Nutan Thakur'. It is further submitted that the husband of the applicant was posted as S.P., Deoria at that relevant point of time and now, he has retired. It is further submitted that name of her husband was shown as 'Ajitabh Thakur' in place of 'Amitabh Thakur' however, her permanent address has been mentioned of Village Khaira, Sitamadhi, State of Bihar which is correct. It is further submitted by learned Senior Advocate that the said property has been mentioned in the ITR submitted

¶9

NABAIL No. 2007 of 2026

¶10

2

¶11

in the year 2001 by her husband which is annexed with the memo of application at page 81. It is also submitted by the learned Senior Advocate that the first informant is inimical towards the husband of the applicant as he has been filing complaints after complaints against him since 2021 and the present case has been lodged only with ulterior motive.

¶12

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has opposed the application for grant of anticipatory bail and submitted that the applicant was allotted an industrial plot, in which, forged name has been entered in the revenue records and the applicant has deliberately concealed her actual name and that too of her husband and she has mentioned her name in the allotment-deed as 'Nutan Devi' and her husband as 'Ajitabh Thakur' in place of 'Nutan Thakur' and 'Amitabh Thakur' respectively. It is further submitted that even the address has been mentioned as village Khaira, Sitamadhi, State of Bihar. It is further submitted that two years after the alleged allotment, the applicant has transferred the said plot in favour of one Sanjay Pratap Singh, in which, she has mentioned her name as 'Nutan Thakur' and that of her husband 'Amitabh Thakur'. It is further submitted that applicant has paid fraud in obtaining the allotment of the said plot. It is further submitted that applicant has obtained the allotment of the said plot under the influence of her husband who was posted as S.P., Deoria at that relevant point of time.

¶13

In reply to the same, learned Senior Counsel for the applicant submit that till date, no suit for cancellation or rectification has been filed by the subsequent transferry- Sanjay Pratap Singh and the said registered document is still in existence since 2001.

¶14

The first information report has been lodged after a delay of 26 years, for which no cogent reason has been provided by the first informant. The first informant has no concern with the said plot. As per the FIR, the applicant allegedly obtained allotment of an industrial plot by showing her name as Nutan

¶15

NABAIL No. 2007 of 2026

¶16

3

¶17

Devi instead of 'Nutan Thakur', and her husband's name as Ajitabh Thakur instead of 'Amitabh Thakur'. However, the address given is village Khaira, Sitamadhi, Bihar. However, it's not found that any village named Khaira does not exist in State of Bihar. Moreover, the applicant's husband, a retired IPS officer, has shown the property in his ITR and property statement filed in 2001, copy of which is annexed with the memo of this application.

¶18

7 It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694 , it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration.

¶19

In the instant case, considering the settled principle of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.

¶20

The anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶21

In the event of arrest of the applicant- Nutan Thakur involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on anticipatory bail 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 :-

¶22

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence and that she would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court concerned;

¶23

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with

¶24

NABAIL No. 2007 of 2026

¶25

4

¶26

the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶27

(iii) The applicant would co-operate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶28

(iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned.

¶29

In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶30

(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.)

¶31

March 19, 2026

¶32

Rama Kant

¶33

Digitally signed by :- RAMA KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Nutan Thakur v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nutan Thakur v. State of Up 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

Rahul Vs State of U.P.

Shiva and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Sarita Alias Guddal Alias Guddi Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Salman Vs State of U.P.

Gudiya Vs State of U.P.

Mohd Farman @ Farman Pradhan Vs State of U.P.