No. - 3575 of 2026 Smt. Radhika Devi State of U.P v. State of Punjab reported in (1980) 2 SCC 565 & Ors.

: Prince Kumar Srivastava, Surendra Dev Court No. - 71 HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.

Heard Sri Prince Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the accused applicant and learned AGA for State.

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed by applicant to grant anticipatory bail in Complaint Case No. 2570/2021, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 470, 323, 504 IPC, P.S.- Tiwaripur, District- Gorakhpur, during the pendency of trial.

It is contended by learned counsel for accused applicant that complainant Kanhai has moved the criminal complaint against the accused applicant with the allegation that the applicant has usurped the property through the Will executed by the father-in-law of applicant in her favour. It is the contention of learned counsel that it was not a forged Will. The father-in-law of the applicant has bequeathed the property in favour of applicant after the death of her husband. When the application was moved for mutation, the Tehsildar has erroneously transferred the property of Kashinath father of complainant in favour of the applicant. Subsequently the error was corrected and the property was accordingly mutated in the name of Kanhai. The applicant has not criminal history. The matter is civil in nature. Hence submits that the interim relief be granted.

It is contended by learned AGA that instruction is not being received so far and seeks time. 2 NABAIL No. 3575 of 2026

The scope of ambit of anticipatory bail is encapsulated in three insightful judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court right from Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia Vs. State of Punjab reported in (1980) 2 SCC 565, Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in (2011) 1 SCC 694 and Sushila Aggarwal and others Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and another reported in (2020) 5 SCC 1, wherein it is consistently held by Hon'ble Apex Court that while granting anticipatory bail, the Court should considering the application of the applicant to evaluate the threat or apprehension of arrest vis-a-vis the nature and gravity of accusation, criminal antecedent of the accused, false or exaggerated implication, need of custodial interrogation, willingness of the accused to cooperate in investigation and trial and the conduct of the accused and flight risk.

This Court while considering the arguments, gravity of accusation, explained criminal history and apprehension of arrest in the case vis-a-vis low flight risk and assurance of the accused in cooperating with the investigation and trial is of considered view to grant interim bail.

In the event of arrest of the applicant- Smt. Radhika Devi involved in the aforesaid case crime shall be released on interim anticipatory bail till

08.05.2026 on her furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned, with the following conditions :- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence and that she would appear before the trial Court on the date fixed unless exempted by the Court concerned; (ii) 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/her/them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicant would co-operate during trial and would not misuse the liberty of bail. (iv) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court concerned. 3 NABAIL No. 3575 of 2026

In default of any of the conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

List this case on 08.05.2026.

Learned AGA is directed to obtain instructions by the next date. April 16, 2026 Sharad/- (Avnish Saxena,J.)