Mayank Kumar Jain, J.

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

2. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant, who is involved in Case Crime No. 269 of 2022, under Sections 420, 406, 506 IPC, Police Station Beeta-II NOIDA, District Gautam Budh Nagar with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

3. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that only allegation against the applicant in the FIR is that the applicant along with his son Vivek Pal prepared forged document and has exerted an amount of Rs. 4000000/- (rupees forty lac only) from the informant. It is next submitted that the agreement to sell has been executed between Vivek Pal and SIP International Pvt. Ltd., copy of agreement has been filed as annexure No. 2. The applicant has no concern with the said agreement to sell. There is no evidence against the applicant regarding receiving of any amount from the informant. He has been made accused in this case only on the fact that the applicant is father of Vivek Pal. It is next contended 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 29.09.2022. The applicant does not have any criminal history to his credit. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that Rs. 3500000/- (rupees thirty five lac ) has been given through bank transaction and Rs. 5,00000/- (rupees five lac) has been given as cash to the accused Vivek Pal.

5. The case of the applicant is distinguishable from the co-accused Vivek Pal, since all the allegations have been levelled against him.

6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of evidence, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

7. Let the applicant Raj Bahadur Singh, involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:

(1) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence during the trial.

(2) The applicant will not influence any witness.

(3) The applicant will appear before the trial Court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

(4) 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

8. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move an application before this Court seeking cancellation of the bail.

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.