PARASNATH KUSHWAHAversusSTATE OF U.P.

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
                        - 8541 of 2026

Parasnath Kushwaha
                                                           .....Applicant(s)
                                  Versus

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

Counsel for Applicant(s)                   :   Adya Prasad Tewari
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)              :   G.A., Manoj Kumar

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

1. Heard, Learned counsel for the applicant, the Learned A.G.A. for the
State, learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.

2. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the
applicant in Case Crime No.312 of 2026, under Sections 319(2), 318(4),
338, 336(3), 340(2) BNS, Police Station- Kotwali Padrauna, District
Kushinagar, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as the
applicant apprehends his arrest in the above-mentioned case.

3. This is the second bail application. The first bail application of the
applicant was dismissed by this Court taking note of the fact that the
applicant has not explained his criminal antecedents and had granted
liberty to the applicant to move a fresh bail application after explaining
the criminal antecedents as are required under Chapter XVIII Rule 18
sub-Rule (7) of the Rules of the Court.

4. A supplementary affidavit has been filed today in Court which is taken
on record.

5. The explanation of the criminal antecedents that has been given in the
supplementary affidavit and the affidavit accompanying the bail
application, is not denied by learned AGA.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant is merely
a marginal witness to the disputed sale deed executed by one Nazir in
                                                      NABAIL No. 8541 of 2026
                               2


favor of Nathuni Prasad. The said Nazir is said to be a fictitious person
and the allegation against the applicant is of witnessing the transaction
between the parties.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant further states that the applicant is not
a beneficiary of the sale deed in question and he has only been implicated
by the informant and the police as he is a witness to the sale deed. The
applicant has not received any money or any other consideration in his
account. He appears to have become the target of some dishonest persons
and could have been the star witness for the transaction but has been
arrayed as an accused.

8. Learned counsel for the informant and the learned AGA have opposed
the prayer for bail and have contended that the applicant and the co-
accused Rajendra Kushwaha were both the witnesses to the sale deed.
During investigation, it has been found that the sale consideration was
deposited by the co-accused Nathuni Prasad, who is the vendee in the
account of Rajendra Kushwaha. This fact clearly establishes the
complicity of the witnesses to the sale deed in the false transaction.

9. Learned counsels have denied the explanation given by the applicant
with respect to his criminal antecedents.

10. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the
parties.

11. The applicant is said to be a marginal witness in sale deed. No Part of
the sale consideration is said to have been received by the applicant. The
sale consideration has been received in the account of the co-accused
Rajendra Kushwaha. Other than the applicant being a witness to the sale
deed, he is neither the beneficiary nor said to be in any manner interested
in the property.

12. Taking note of the entire facts and circumstances of the case as also
the fact that co-accused Rajendra Kushwaha has been arrested and is in
jail and and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I
deem it appropriate to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail.
                                                                                          NABAIL No. 8541 of 2026
                                                                   3


                                    13. Taking into account all the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem
                                    it fit to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail.

                                    14. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant
                                    is allowed.

                                    15. In the event of the arrest of the applicant Parasnath Kushwaha, he
                                    shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on anticipatory bail
                                    on furnishing a personal bond and surety each in the like amount to the
                                    satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station/Court
                                    concerned with the following conditions:-

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

                                    ii. that 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;

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

                                    iv. that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution
                                    witness;

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

                                    17. 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 8, 2026
                                    S.A.




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