Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in

1. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State and perused the record.

2. This first bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.124 of 2024, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Para, District Lucknow.

3. As per contents of first information report, the property in question belongs to father of informant late Khalil Ahmad and the persons named in the F.I.R. were instrumental in creation of a forged and fabricated Will dated 18.12.2022 in their favour, which was also registered and on the basis of which mutation was also effected in the relevant records. The informant alleges himself to be the heir of late Khalil Ahmad in whose favour a registered Will dated 28.10.2009 was earlier executed by late Khalil Ahmad,

4. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the charges levelled against him. It is submitted that applicant is not named in the first information report and the only role attributable to him is that his photograph was used for the purpose of impersonation of Late Khalil Ahmad. It is therefore submitted that the Sections imputed against applicant are clearly not made out. It is also submitted that despite the applicant being under incarceration since 24.04.2024, trial proceedings have not yet commenced.

5. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State on the basis of counter affidavit submits that although the name of applicant does not feature in the first information report as an accused but his role was apparent since it was his photograph which was used for purposes of impersonation of Late Kalil Ahmad.

6. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40 has specifically held that bail is to be a norm and an under-trial is not required to be in jail for ever pending trial. Relevant paragraphs of the judgment are as under :- "21. In bail applications, generally, it has been laid down from the earliest times that the object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative. Deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment, unless it is required to ensure that an accused person will stand his trial when called upon. The courts owe more than verbal respect to the principle that punishment begins after conviction, and that every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried and duly found guilty." "27. This Court, time and again, has stated that bail is the rule and committal to jail an exception. It has also observed that refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution."

7. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the material on record, prima facie, and subject to further evidence being led in trial, it appears that the only role attributable to applicant is utilization of his photograph by the named persons for purposes of impersonation of Late Khalil Ahmad. There does not appear to be any other role assigned to applicant in the alleged forgery. Even otherwise, it appears that the will dated 18.12.2022 is a registered instrument which has not been cancelled or set aside by any court of competent jurisdiction.

8. The applicant is in jail for almost one year without trial having yet commenced. As such, without expressing any opinion on the merits of case, this Court finds, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

8. Accordingly bail application is allowed.

9. Let applicant Mohammad Ajij @ Mohd. Ajij Qureshi, involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his 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) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court, absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. Order Date :- 17.3.2025 kvg/- GIREESAN KV GIREESAN KV GIREESAN KV GIREESAN KV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench

1. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State and perused the record.

2. This first bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.124 of 2024, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Para, District Lucknow.

3. As per contents of first information report, the property in question belongs to father of informant late Khalil Ahmad and the persons named in the F.I.R. were instrumental in creation of a forged and fabricated Will dated 18.12.2022 in their favour, which was also registered and on the basis of which mutation was also effected in the relevant records. The informant alleges himself to be the heir of late Khalil Ahmad in whose favour a registered Will dated 28.10.2009 was earlier executed by late Khalil Ahmad,

4. Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the charges levelled against him. It is submitted that applicant is not named in the first information report and the only role attributable to him is that his photograph was used for the purpose of impersonation of Late Khalil Ahmad. It is therefore submitted that the Sections imputed against applicant are clearly not made out. It is also submitted that despite the applicant being under incarceration since 24.04.2024, trial proceedings have not yet commenced.

5. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State on the basis of counter affidavit submits that although the name of applicant does not feature in the first information report as an accused but his role was apparent since it was his photograph which was used for purposes of impersonation of Late Kalil Ahmad.

6. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40 has specifically held that bail is to be a norm and an under-trial is not required to be in jail for ever pending trial. Relevant paragraphs of the judgment are as under :- "21. In bail applications, generally, it has been laid down from the earliest times that the object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative. Deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment, unless it is required to ensure that an accused person will stand his trial when called upon. The courts owe more than verbal respect to the principle that punishment begins after conviction, and that every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried and duly found guilty." "27. This Court, time and again, has stated that bail is the rule and committal to jail an exception. It has also observed that refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution."

7. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the material on record, prima facie, and subject to further evidence being led in trial, it appears that the only role attributable to applicant is utilization of his photograph by the named persons for purposes of impersonation of Late Khalil Ahmad. There does not appear to be any other role assigned to applicant in the alleged forgery. Even otherwise, it appears that the will dated 18.12.2022 is a registered instrument which has not been cancelled or set aside by any court of competent jurisdiction.

8. The applicant is in jail for almost one year without trial having yet commenced. As such, without expressing any opinion on the merits of case, this Court finds, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.

8. Accordingly bail application is allowed.

9. Let applicant Mohammad Ajij @ Mohd. Ajij Qureshi, involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his 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) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court, absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. Order Date :- 17.3.2025 kvg/- GIREESAN KV GIREESAN KV GIREESAN KV GIREESAN KV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench Lucknow Bench