High Court · 2025
Case Details
3-As per the prosecution case in brief, the complainant Bhola Ram S/o Ramji Lal got a First Information Report lodged on 15.12.2024 for the offence under Sections 340(2), 336(3), 338, 318(4) of B.N.S., 2023 against Jai Prakash, Gaurav Chauhan, Dharm Singh Chauhan and Jogendra Singh stating inter-alia that he is owner of an agricultural land bearing plot no. 00165, Khasra No.468, area 1.3910 hectare situated in village Barchawali, Tehsil Chhata, District Mathura. On 30.10.2024, when Jai Prakash along with other accused persons went to take physical possession over his land at the spot, then he came to know that on 16.10.2024 accused persons in a collusion with each other got a forged sale deed of his aforesaid land executed whereas he had not executed any sale deed in favour of Jai Prakash and others. It was also revealed that the accused persons while getting said fake sale-deed executed, has used his forged photographs and Adhaar Card and similarly they also used forged photographs and Adhar Card of Vikram and Karan Bhardwaj. The F.I.R. also alleges that the complainant did not receive any sale consideration amount. 4-Main substratum of argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. Since the name of applicant and name of complainant are same, therefore accused persons using name of applicant, falsely implicated him, whereas applicant has no concern with the named accused persons, namely, Jai Prakash, Gaurav Chauhan, Dharm Singh Chauhan and Jogendra Singh. It is pointed out that name of the applicant is Bholaram S/o Pratap Singh whereas name of complainant is Bholaram S/o Ram ji Lal. The accused persons in order to cheat and grab the land of complainant got an account opened in the name of the applicant-Bholaram S/o Pratap Singh in HDFC Bank and thereafter got sale consideration amount deposited in the said account and later-on they got the said amount transferred from the fake account of applicant to the different accounts, as such the applicant is not beneficiary of the alleged sale deed. Applicant is neither purchaser nor seller of the said land. Applicant has been falsely shown by the co- accused as owner of the land in question. It is further pointed out that while executing a fake sale deed, Bijendra S/o Bhadai Ram has been shown as Bholaram (land owner), Kanha and Badan have been shown as Vikram and Karan Bhardwaj. Referring the statement of accused Jogendra Singh, it is pointed out that he has confessed that since Jai Prakash, Gaurav Chauhan and their father had to buy land, therefore, he in collusion with Lakhan made a plan to show them land of some persons and to make fake land owner and witnesses and get a fake sale deed done and grab money from them. accordingly they adopting different mode operandi got a fake sale deed executed and extracted sale consideration amount through six cheques in the name of Bholaram. After a lot of searching, they found a person named Bholaram (applicant) S/o of Pratap Singh, residence of Sher Nagar, Police Station Koshikalan and got his account opened in Axis Bank behind his back and thereafter they got the said cheques cleared through his account and thereafter they got said sale consideration amount transferred from the fake account of Bholaram (applicant) to their account. When the purchaser came to know about the said fake sale deed, the he stopped the transaction of remaining three cheques. It is also pointed out that the co-accused Yogendra @ Jogendra @ Ramkishan has been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 23.05.2025 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.17829 of 2025. The co-accused Lakhan has also been granted interim anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 20.05.2025 in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 482 BNSS No.3922 of 2025, hence the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail. Lastly it is submitted that there is no chance of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is languishing in jail since 28.03.2025 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the early disposal of the case. 5-On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the factum of the case as argued on behalf of the applicant. 6-Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties as noted above, I am of the view that the case of the applicant stands on better footing than that of co- accused Yogendra @ Jogendra @ Ramkishan and Lakhan, hence applicant has made out a case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is hereby allowed. 7-Let the applicant Bholaram, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) That the applicant shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable. (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 ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) That after his release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity. (iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned before the release of the applicant on bail. 8-In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant. 9-It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial Court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order. Order Date :- 4.6.2025 Sanjeet SANJEET KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3-As per the prosecution case in brief, the complainant Bhola Ram S/o Ramji Lal got a First Information Report lodged on 15.12.2024 for the offence under Sections 340(2), 336(3), 338, 318(4) of B.N.S., 2023 against Jai Prakash, Gaurav Chauhan, Dharm Singh Chauhan and Jogendra Singh stating inter-alia that he is owner of an agricultural land bearing plot no. 00165, Khasra No.468, area 1.3910 hectare situated in village Barchawali, Tehsil Chhata, District Mathura. On 30.10.2024, when Jai Prakash along with other accused persons went to take physical possession over his land at the spot, then he came to know that on 16.10.2024 accused persons in a collusion with each other got a forged sale deed of his aforesaid land executed whereas he had not executed any sale deed in favour of Jai Prakash and others. It was also revealed that the accused persons while getting said fake sale-deed executed, has used his forged photographs and Adhaar Card and similarly they also used forged photographs and Adhar Card of Vikram and Karan Bhardwaj. The F.I.R. also alleges that the complainant did not receive any sale consideration amount. 4-Main substratum of argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. Since the name of applicant and name of complainant are same, therefore accused persons using name of applicant, falsely implicated him, whereas applicant has no concern with the named accused persons, namely, Jai Prakash, Gaurav Chauhan, Dharm Singh Chauhan and Jogendra Singh. It is pointed out that name of the applicant is Bholaram S/o Pratap Singh whereas name of complainant is Bholaram S/o Ram ji Lal. The accused persons in order to cheat and grab the land of complainant got an account opened in the name of the applicant-Bholaram S/o Pratap Singh in HDFC Bank and thereafter got sale consideration amount deposited in the said account and later-on they got the said amount transferred from the fake account of applicant to the different accounts, as such the applicant is not beneficiary of the alleged sale deed. Applicant is neither purchaser nor seller of the said land. Applicant has been falsely shown by the co- accused as owner of the land in question. It is further pointed out that while executing a fake sale deed, Bijendra S/o Bhadai Ram has been shown as Bholaram (land owner), Kanha and Badan have been shown as Vikram and Karan Bhardwaj. Referring the statement of accused Jogendra Singh, it is pointed out that he has confessed that since Jai Prakash, Gaurav Chauhan and their father had to buy land, therefore, he in collusion with Lakhan made a plan to show them land of some persons and to make fake land owner and witnesses and get a fake sale deed done and grab money from them. accordingly they adopting different mode operandi got a fake sale deed executed and extracted sale consideration amount through six cheques in the name of Bholaram. After a lot of searching, they found a person named Bholaram (applicant) S/o of Pratap Singh, residence of Sher Nagar, Police Station Koshikalan and got his account opened in Axis Bank behind his back and thereafter they got the said cheques cleared through his account and thereafter they got said sale consideration amount transferred from the fake account of Bholaram (applicant) to their account. When the purchaser came to know about the said fake sale deed, the he stopped the transaction of remaining three cheques. It is also pointed out that the co-accused Yogendra @ Jogendra @ Ramkishan has been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 23.05.2025 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.17829 of 2025. The co-accused Lakhan has also been granted interim anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 20.05.2025 in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 482 BNSS No.3922 of 2025, hence the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail. Lastly it is submitted that there is no chance of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is languishing in jail since 28.03.2025 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the early disposal of the case. 5-On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the factum of the case as argued on behalf of the applicant. 6-Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties as noted above, I am of the view that the case of the applicant stands on better footing than that of co- accused Yogendra @ Jogendra @ Ramkishan and Lakhan, hence applicant has made out a case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is hereby allowed. 7-Let the applicant Bholaram, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) That the applicant shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable. (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 ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) That after his release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity. (iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned before the release of the applicant on bail. 8-In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant. 9-It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial Court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order. Order Date :- 4.6.2025 Sanjeet SANJEET KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad