HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Second Anticipatory Bail Application No.35 of 2024 Aas Mohd ..….....Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand ….….Respondent Present:- Ms. Sadaf, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Pramod Tiwari, Brief Holder for the State. Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral) The applicant seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No.659 of 2023, dated 19.10.2023, under Sections 34, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, Police Station Roorkee, District Haridwar. This is the second anticipatory bail application of the applicant. His first Anticipatory Bail Application has already been dismissed for want of prosecution on 26.12.2024. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3. According to the prosecution case, the applicant impersonated the informant and executed a power of attorney and there were subsequent transfer to it. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the co-accused Jogender has managed the 2 entire show; he procured witnesses and by concealing the real person, he got the signatures done in the documents; the applicant did not receive any money; the co-accused Jogender has already been granted bail. 5. Learned State counsel would submit that the applicant impersonated the informant and executed the power of attorney and subsequent transactions were also done. 6. The allegations against the applicant are serious. He impersonated the informant and executed power of attorney in favour of some other person and there were also some transactions. 7. Having considered, this Court is of the view that this is not a case, in which, the applicant should be granted anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the instant second anticipatory bail application deserves to be rejected. 8. The second anticipatory bail application is rejected. (Ravindra Maithani, J.) 18.03.2025 Sanjay