Allahabad High Court
BALVANT KUSHWAHAversusSTATE OF U.P.
- Decided
- Bench
- RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA
Holding
The court held that, given no prima facie evidence of an offence and the FIR's delay, anticipatory bail under Section 482 CrPC must be granted to the applicant.
Summary
The High Court considered an anticipatory bail application filed by Balvant Kushwaha under Section 482 of the CrPC in a case involving alleged fraud in the execution of two sale deeds. The applicant argued that he was not the vendee and that the second deed was forged, asserting no criminal antecedent. The State contended that the applicant was the primary accused who introduced the informant and facilitated the fraudulent deeds. The court noted the absence of any civil challenge to the deed, the lack of material establishing a prima facie offence, and the delay in filing the FIR under Section 173(4). Consequently, the court granted anticipatory bail with standard conditions and clarified that the order does not prejudice the merits of the case.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the applicant under Section 482 CrPC in the absence of a prima facie case.
- Whether the allegations of fraud in the sale deeds constitute offences under the cited IPC sections.
- Whether the delay in lodging the FIR affects the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 173(4), 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 318(4), 338, 351(2), 351(3), 352, 61(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 482 CrPC
- sale deed fraud
- Indian Penal Code
- delay in FIR
- bail conditions
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No.
- 9384 of 2026
Balvant Kushwaha
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P.
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ashok Kumar Yadav, Rajesh Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 71
HON'BLE RAJIV LOCHAN SHUKLA, J.
1. Heard Learned counsel for the applicant and 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 applicant in Case Crime No. 240 of 2025, under Sections
318(4), 338, 352, 351(2), 351(3), 61(2) of BNS, P.S. Raksa, District
Jhansi, with a prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as the
applicant apprehends his arrest in the abovementioned case.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the
applicant is not the vendee of the sale deed in dispute. Allegation
is that in the garb of purchasing one plot from the informant, two
plots were purchased and the second registry was with respect to
the adjacent plot to the one, which was actually sold. Learned
counsel for the applicant stated that the applicant is stated to be
the person who had introduced the informant to the co accused in
whose favour a sale deed was executed by the informant. It is
further contended that two registered sale deeds have been
executed, one sale deed is being admitted by the informant himself
and the other sale deed, which was supposedly executed by
defrauding the informant and telling him that it was on account of a
server mal-function, has no concern with the applicant. The
applicant has no criminal antecedent.
NABAIL No. 9384 of 2026
2
4. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail and has
contended that the applicant is the primary accused. He was the
one who had introduced the informant to the co accused and by
feigning a server outage, two sale deeds instead of one sale deed
were executed. Only Rs. 3,50,000/- were paid towards the sale
consideration.
5. I have considered the submissions made by the Learned
counsels for the parties.
6. There is no material to indicate that the sale deed in question
has been challenged before any Civil Court.
7. Taking note of the entire facts and circumstances of the case, in
the prima facie opinion of the court, no offence is made out against
the applicant. The FIR has been lodged with delay on an
application under Section 173(4) BNSS. I deem it appropriate to
enlarge applicant on anticipatory bail.
8. In view of the above, the anticipatory bail application of the
applicant is allowed.
9. In the event of the arrest of the applicant- Balvant Kushwaha,
he shall be released forthwith in the aforesaid case crime on
anticipatory bail on furnishing a 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 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;
NABAIL No. 9384 of 2026
3
iv. that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution
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.)
October 1, 2026
RavindraKSingh
Digitally signed by :-
RAVINDRA KUMAR SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…