UDAY PRATAP SINGH @ RAJA SINGH AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
                        - 10124 of 2026

Uday Pratap Singh @ Raja Singh And Another
                                                           .....Applicant(s)
                                  Versus

State of U.P. and Another
                                                               .....Opposite
                                                                     Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)           :   Anil Kumar, G.A., Mukesh Joshi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)      :


Court No. - 71
                 HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J.

1. Heard the Learned counsel for the applicants and the Learned A.G.A.
for the State as well as perused the record.

2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the
applicants in Case Crime No. 16 of 2025, under Sections 320, 332(c),
335, 336(3), 338, 340(2), 61(2) of B.N.S., Police Station- Naubasta,
District Kanpur Nagar, with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory
bail as the applicants apprehend their arrest in the abovementioned case.

3. The Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the applicant
No. 1 is not named in the FIR. He is the tenant in the property in dispute.
The co-accused Saksham Sonkar and applicant No. 2 were both marginal
witnesses in the sale deed executed by one Brij Bihari Lal in favour of the
co-accused Pratyush Kumar. Pratyush Kumar has filed a civil suit being
O.S. No. 1692 of 2024 seeking injunction against the informant in which
an interim order in the form of status quo over the property in question is
operating till date. The applicants had filed a Criminal Misc. Writ Petition
No. 12877 of 2025 in which this Court by the order dated 18.6.2025, had
stayed the arrest of the applicants during investigation till cognizance on
the police report. Similarly situated co-accused Saksham Sonkar and
Pratyush Kumar have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in
NABAIL No. 6438 of 2026 and 7737 of 2026 respectively. The case of
the applicants stands on a similar footing.
                                                      NABAIL No. 10124 of 2026
                                2


4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail,
but does not dispute the fact that similarly situated co-accused have been
granted anticipatory bail by this Court.

5. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned counsels for
the parties.

6. The co-accused Pratyush Kumar and Saksham Sonkar have been
granted anticipatory bail by this Court. An interim injunction in the form
of status quo over the property is operating in the civil suit filed by the co-
accused Pratyush Kumar. The applicant No. 1 was not named in the FIR
and the applicant No. 2 is a marginal witness of the disputed sale deed.


7. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and also
the fact that similarly situated co-accused have been granted anticipatory
bail, I deem it appropriate to enlarge applicants on anticipatory bail.

8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicants
is allowed.

9. In the event of the arrest of the applicants- Uday Pratap Singh @ Raja
Singh and Anand Kumar, they shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid
case crime on anticipatory bail on furnishing of their personal bond
and surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House
Officer of the police station/Court concerned with the following
conditions:-

i. the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a
police officer as and when required;

ii. that the applicants 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or
to any police officer;

iii. that the applicants shall not leave India without the previous
permission of the Court;

iv. that the applicants shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution
                                                                                      NABAIL No. 10124 of 2026
                                                                  3


                                    witness;

                                    10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court concerned
                                    shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

                                    11. It is made clear that observations made hereinabove are exclusively
                                    for deciding the instant anticipatory bail application and are not to be
                                    considered to be an opinion on the merits of the case.




                                                                                   (Rajiv Lochan Shukla,J.)
                                    September 28, 2026
                                    Junaid




Digitally signed by :-
JUNAID AHMAD
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad