Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:17250 Court No. - 17 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5278 of 2023 Applicant :- Jaishram Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Shobh Nath Pandey,Dev Mani Mishra,Devanshu Pratap Singh,Neeraj Tewari,S.P. Singh Somvanshi,Sagar Singh,Santosh Srivastava,Shri Ram Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for the complainant. 2. This is second bail application. 3. This bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 250 of 2021, u/s 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station- Safdarganj, District- Barabanki. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that first bail application of the applicant was rejected on 06.02.2023, on which date, at the time of dismissal of the same, a direction was issued to the trial Court to conclude the trial within 08 months from the date of the order, but the trial has not been concluded till today, and only one witness has been examined. He further submits that examination-in-chief of P.W.-1 has already been concluded and the cross-examination is going on. He next submits that there is no possibility of conclusion of the trial in near future. He lastly submits that the applicant, who is ready to cooperate in the trial, does not have any criminal antecedent, hence, he may be enlarged on bail. 5. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the prayer of the applicant. They jointly submit that the applicant is an imposter and represented himself as Satyanarayan, who obtained forged Aadhar Card along with Pan Card and opened an account in the name of Satyanarayan. It is further submitted that the informant relying on the applicant, considering him as actual recorded tenure holder, transferred an amount of Rs. 48,50,000/- in the account and sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- was also given in cash, and this amount was withdrawn by the applicant by transferring it in different accounts. It is also submitted that the applicant denied for execution of the sale deed, as a result, F.I.R. of the case in question was lodged against him and sufficient evidence was also found against him. 6. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and going through the contents of the F.I.R. as well as other relevant material, it is evident that the applicant has claimed himself as Satyanarayan and took sum of Rs. 50,00,000/- for execution of the sale deed. These allegations against the applicant are serious in nature. Therefore, no case for bail is made out. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. 7. The trial Court is directed to conclude the trial in question, if possible, within six months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. 8. Office is directed to communicate this order to the trial Court, forthwith. Order Date :- 26.3.2025 Arpan Digitally signed by :- ARPAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench