Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:15678 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11166 of 2024 Applicant :- Naveen Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Amrendra Nath Tripathi,Kamini Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Saurabh Upadhyay Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State as well as Mr. Anil Kumar Upadhyay, learned counsel for informant and perused the record. 2. This second bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.550 of 2023, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 & 506 IPC registered at Police Station Mohanlalganj, District Lucknow. First Bail Application bearing No.4918 of 2024 filed by applicant has been rejected by means of order dated 28.08.2024, the second bail application having been released has been listed before this Court and is therefore being decided. 3. As per allegations levelled in the First Information Report, a sale-deed is said to have been executed on 02.05.2023 indicating M/s R.S. Bikes & Wheels Private Ltd as the seller and M/s Brij Gopi Developers Ltd. as purchasers of the property in question. Applicant is indicated as the authorized signatory of the directors of the seller company on the basis of an authorization dated 01.05.2023. The allegations levelled in the first information report also indicate that subsequently a second sale-deed was executed on 03.05.2023 of the same property by M/s Brij Gopi Developers Ltd. in favour of one Mithlesh Kumar Pathak. The informant is the purchaser of the property by virtue of sale-deed dated 03.05.2023 in which allegation has further been made that the sale- deed has been executed only for the purpose of defrauding the informant in terms of a conspiracy between alleged authorized signatory of the seller company of the first sale-deed and the parties thereto as well as of the sellers of the second sale- deed. 4. The earlier bail application preferred by applicant has been rejected vide order dated 28.08.2024 considering the fact that main allegations were against the applicant of projecting himself to be an authorized signatory of the company, which was prima facie found to be wrong since the substantive allegations of involvement of applicant were apparent. 5. Learned counsel for applicant submits that he has been falsely implicated with regard to allegations levelled against him and that he was in fact only an agent of the M/s R.S. Bikes & Wheels Private Ltd. and executed the sale-deed dated 02.05.2023 only on the basis of the authorization dated 01.05.2023. It is submitted that consequent to rejection of the first bail application, fresh developments have taken place inasmuch as a charge-sheet has been filed with regard to the matter against four accused persons including the applicant. It is submitted that Forensic Science Laboratory report has also been submitted which form the part of case-diary indicating mismatch in alleged authorization dated 01.05.2023 with signatures of the Directors of R.S. Bikes & Wheels Private Ltd. It is also submitted that subsequently in other proceedings, one of the accused Anuj Singh Rajawat in the bail application in the same crime number has also given an undertaking that he would be making good the consideration indicated in the second sale-deed and will also file a suit for cancellation of both sale-deeds in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. no.1094 of 2025. 6. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State and learned counsel for informant have opposed the bail application with the submission that there is no new good ground to consider the second bail application particularly in view of observations made while rejecting the first bail application. It is submitted that even otherwise as per Forensic Science Laboratory report, the allegations of forgery levelled against applicant are clearly made out. 7. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and upon perusal of material available on record, it is admitted that subsequent to order dated 28.08.2024, rejecting the first bail application, the aforesaid developments have taken place. It is admitted between parties that Forensic Science Laboratory report indicates mismatch of signatures in the authorization dated 01.05.2023. 8. Considering the fact that the First Information Report clearly has alleged the applicant falsely projecting himself as an agent of the company and the director by virtue of the authorization dated 01.05.2023 which forms the basis of subsequent two sale-deeds and trial not yet having commenced, rejection of first bail application on same grounds, this Court does not find any good ground to entertain the second bail application which is accordingly rejected. Order Date :- 17.3.2025 Subodh/- Digitally signed by :- SUBODH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- SUBODH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- SUBODH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench