##PAGE1##

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11500 of 2026

Jagmohan

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

.....Opposite

Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Satya Prakash Shukla, Shivam Tiwari

Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ashish Kumar Singh, G.A.

Court No. - 70

HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State,

learned counsel for the opposite party and perused the record.

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on

bail in Case Crime No. 156 of 2025, under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338,

336(3), 340(2) of BNS, Police Station Jaria, District Hamirpur, during the

pendency of trial.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent

and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motives.

It is further submitted that the applicant has neither executed the sale

deed, as alleged by the prosecution, nor played any role in the alleged

transaction. According to the learned counsel, the applicant has been

unnecessarily implicated at the instance of the co-accused persons and the

informant. It is also submitted that no amount has been credited to the

bank account of the applicant, nor did he receive or accept the cheque of

Rs. 13 lakhs, as alleged in the FIR. The criminal history of the applicant

has been duly explained in paragraph no. 3 of the supplementary affidavit.

It is further submitted that the investigation has been concluded and the

charge-sheet has already been filed. The applicant has been in judicial

custody since 27.11.2025. There is no likelihood of the applicant

tampering with the prosecution evidence or influencing the witnesses. It is

lastly submitted that, in the event of his release on bail, the applicant shall

cooperate with the trial proceedings and shall not misuse the liberty of

BAIL No. 11500 of 2026

2

bail.

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail. Per contra,

learned counsel for the opposite party, Shri Siddhgopal, submits that he is

the real owner of the property in question. It is further submitted that a

civil suit for cancellation of the impugned sale deed, instituted by the wife

of the informant against the present applicant, is pending before the

competent Civil Court. It is, therefore, urged that considering the

allegations and the pendency of the civil proceedings, no case for grant of

bail is made out.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the

material available on record, this Court finds that the investigation has

been concluded and the charge-sheet has already been filed. The applicant

is in judicial custody since 27.11.2025. The criminal history of the

applicant has been explained in the supplementary affidavit. It is also not

disputed that a civil suit for cancellation of the impugned sale deed is

pending before the competent Civil Court, indicating that the dispute with

regard to the property is also engaging the jurisdiction of the Civil Court.

At this stage, without entering into the merits of the rival claims or

expressing any opinion on the pendency of the civil proceedings, and

considering the nature of the accusations, the evidence collected during

investigation, the period of incarceration undergone by the applicant, the

absence of any material to indicate that the applicant is likely to tamper

with the prosecution evidence or influence the witnesses, and the settled

principles governing grant of bail, this Court is of the considered view

that the applicant has made out a case for grant of bail.

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case,

the present bail application is allowed.

Let the applicant-Jagmohan be released on bail in the aforesaid case on

furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the

satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed,

unless his personal presence is exempted.