Allahabad High Court
MANOJ JATAVversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
Holding
The applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Summary
Manoj Jatav applied for bail in a case where he is charged under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the IPC for allegedly transferring land using a forged power of attorney. The applicant argued that he was merely a power of attorney holder acting on behalf of Kishan Chand, that the land was not yet recorded in the revenue records in the informant's name, and that he is a poor, law‑abiding citizen with no prior convictions. The prosecution contended that the power of attorney was forged and that the applicant had illegally transferred the land already purchased by the informant. The court, noting the lack of concrete evidence of personal culpability, the principle of non‑custodial interrogation after charge‑sheet filing, overcrowded jails, and the Supreme Court’s guidance in Kapil Wadhawan v. CBI (2025) and the 2023 bail policy, decided to grant bail with strict conditions. The bail order required a personal bond, two sureties, and compliance with conditions prohibiting tampering with evidence, further criminal activity, and non‑cooperation with the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to an accused charged with offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC pending trial.
- Whether the alleged forgery of a power of attorney and the alleged illegal land transfer preclude the grant of bail.
- Whether considerations of jail overcrowding and Supreme Court precedents justify bail in this case.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 420, 467, 468, 471
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Indian Penal Code
- forgery
- power of attorney
- overcrowded prisons
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20015 of 2025
Manoj Jatav
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Brij Bhushan Upadhyay,
Sunil Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ankit Prajapati, G.A.,
Mayank Prakash Rawat,
Surendra Kumar
Court No. - 69
HON'BLE ARUN KUMAR SINGH DESHWAL, J.
1. Heard Sri Brij Bhushan Upadhyay, learned counsel for
the applicant, Sri Mayank Prakash Rawat, learned counsel
for the first informant and Sri Roshan Kumar Singh, learned
A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer
to release the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.129 of
2025, under Sections-420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC, Police
Station-Sadar Bazar, District-Agra, during the pendency of
the trial.
3. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that as
per the allegation in the FIR, the first informant as well as
his relatives have purchased the land in Gata Nos.289 and
290, at Mauza Rohta, Tehsil-Agra through sale deed dated
21.01.2013. Thereafter, the applicant being the power of
attorney holder of Kishan Chand through power of attorney
dated 25.11.2021 again transferred the land in Gata
No.289 to the co-accused through sale deed dated
17.01.2022. It is further submitted that on the date of
BAIL No. 20015 of 2025
2
execution of power of attorney by Kishan Chand in favour
of the applicant, the name of Kishan Chand as well as his
brother Kapur Chand was in the khatauni and till that date,
the name of the first informant was not mutated in the
revenue record. Therefore, applicant bonafidely being a
power of attorney holder transferred the land in question as
per the instruction of Kishan Chand and the sale
consideration was also given to Kishan Chand. It is further
submitted that applicant is a poor person and he has not
committed any offence. It is further submitted that the
applicant has explained the criminal history of five cases in
the accompanying affidavit. It is further submitted that
charge sheet has been filed in the present case, therefore,
there is no requirement of custodial interrogation. The
applicant is a law abiding citizen and he is languishing in
jail since 04.03.2025. In case, he is granted bail, he will not
misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial
proceedings.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and
learned AGA have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail
and submitted that the applicant on the basis of forged
power of attorney dated 25.11.2021 transferred the land
which was already purchased by the first informant through
sale deed dated 21.01.2013. Therefore, applicant is not
entitled to be released on bail.
5. Considering the aforesaid submission and taking into
account that on the date of execution of power of attorney
by Kishan Chand, in favour of the applicant, the name of
Kishan Chand was mentioned in the revenue record and
there was no whisper about the sale deed dated
21.01.2013 in the revenue record, as well as the fact that
applicant is simply a power of attorney holder of Kishan
Chand and whatever offence has been committed, is
committed by Kishan Chand and taking into account
BAIL No. 20015 of 2025
3
overcrowded jails and heavy pendency of criminal cases
before the trial courts as well as considering the mandate of
the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Kapil
Wadhawan vs Central Bureau of Investigation reported
in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 3038 and without expressing any
opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that
the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
6. Let the applicant- Manoj Jatav, involved in the
aforementioned crime 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:-
i. 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.
ii. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial/investigation
sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
iii. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or
commission of any crime after being released on bail.
iv. The applicant shall attend in accordance with the
conditions of the bond executed by him.
7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall
be a ground for cancellation of bail.
8. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and
sureties be verified by the court concerned before the
bonds are accepted.
9. It is made clear that the applicant shall be released on
the basis of computer generated copy of this order,
downloaded from the official website of High Court
BAIL No. 20015 of 2025
4
Allahabad and verified by the concerned counsel with the
undertaking that the certified copy will be filed within 15
days.
10. It is further directed that the trial court shall send the
release order to the concerned jail through Bail Order
Management System (BOMS) to ensure early release of
the applicant.
11. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the
applicant through concerned Jail Superintendent via e-mail
or e-prison portal in compliance of the order of the Apex
Court in the case of Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, In
Re: Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No.4 of 2021 decided
on 31.01.2023 reported in (2024) 10 SCC 685.
February 27, 2026
S.C.
(Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SHUBHAM CHAURASIA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…