HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL First Bail Application No. 2104 of 2024 Gajendra Singh Chaudhary ….....Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ….….Respondent Present:- Mr. Sachin Panwar, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. V.S. Rawat, A.G.A. for the State. Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral) Applicant is in judicial custody in FIR No.173 of 2023, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC, Police Station Kotdwar, District Pauri Garhwal. He has sought his release on bail. 2. According to the FIR, the brother-in-law of the informant, Badri Vishal Upreti, had died in the year 2021, but his property has been sold by impersonation in the year 2022. The FIR is named against various persons. The applicant is not named in the FIR. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant did not receive any money; no transaction was done in the name of the applicant; nothing has been revealed during investigation that any forged document was prepared by the applicant. 2 4. Learned State Counsel would submit that after examination of the sale deed, it was revealed that it is the applicant, who impersonated the deceased Badri Vishal Upreti. His fingerprints were detected from the sale deed. 5. In fact, according to the prosecution, the Aadhaar card of the deceased Badri Vishal Upreti was forged, and, thereafter, by impersonation, sale deed was executed. The prosecution has come up with the case that in the sale deed, it is the applicant, who impersonated the deceased Badri Vishal Upreti, as the seller. His fingerprints have been detected on those sale deeds. It is a very serious case. 6. Having considered, this Court does not see any new ground, which may entitle the applicant to bail. Accordingly, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 7. The bail application is rejected. (Ravindra Maithani, J.) 22.05.2025 Ravi Bisht