Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 226 (ALL)

Brajesh Kumar Awasthi v. State of U. P.

2025-02-06

KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR

body2025
JUDGMENT : Karunesh Singh Pawar, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 2. It is alleged in the prosecution case that the name of his father was registered as the sole owner ¼rugk½ of the land recorded in CH Form 45 for Gata Nos. 57 and 65, Village Bhadua Tarhar, Gonda, However, his name was not entered in the Khatauni. It was only after a case for correction of the aforesaid error was allowed, the name of his father was entered into the Khatauni for Fasli Year 1381-86. Subsequently, the applicant/accused, in collusion with co-accused and certain Tehsil employees, allegedly tampered with the records and fraudulently added the term ^^vkfn** after the first informant’s father’s name. This alteration enabled him to claim that his father, Murlidhar Awasthi, was entitled to half of the property. Following this, Murlidhar Awasthi executed a sale deed in favor of Vimlesh, the applicant’s wife. When the first informant tried to pursue legal action regarding the matter, Brijesh Kumar Awasthi and his associates allegedly implicated him in false rape cases, leading to his imprisonment. Upon his acquittal, he started pursuing the aforesaid case all over again. 3. It has been submitted on behalf of the applicant that the alleged forgery is said to have been committed in the year 1979 and thereafter between the father of the complainant and father of the applicant, a series of litigation took place which have been pleaded in para 9 to 19 of the bail application. These litigation regarding the land in question continued for a period of 26 years. The allegations primarily involve the applicant’s late father, and the FIR contains general accusations without specifying the role of any particular accused. The offences are triable by a magistrate. Learned counsel for the applicant has explained criminal history of the applicant in para 27 of the bail application. 4. It has been further submitted that co-accused Anil Kumar Singh who was assigned similar role to that of the applicant has been enlarged on bail vide order dated 03.10.2024 passed in criminal misc. bail application No. 10557 of 2024. 5. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. bail application No. 10557 of 2024. 5. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. 6. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant. 7. On due consideration to the general nature of the allegations in the FIR, the long-standing litigation between the fathers of the complainant and the applicant, the magistrate-triable nature of the offences, the filing of the charge sheet and the applicant’s incarceration since 25.11.2022, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant Brajesh Kumar Awasthi involved in Case Crime No. 47/2024, under Sections 419/420/467/468/471/120-B IPC, Police Station - Kotwali Nagar, District - Gonda, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.