SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S 2026:UHC:3978 BA1 No. 728 of 2026 Pinku Alias Ajay ....Applicant Vs. State of Uttarakhand and Another ......Respondents Hon’ble Ashish Naithani, J. Mr. Prakash Chandra, learned counsel for the Applicant. 2. Mr. Chitrarth Kandpal, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand. 3. The present Bail Application has been moved by the Applicant—Pinku alias Ajay, S/o Rajkumar, R/o Village Peetpur, P.S. Kotwali Laksar, District Haridwar, who is in judicial custody in connection with Case Crime No. 754 of 2024, registered at Police Station Roorkee, District Haridwar, for offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. Learned counsel for the Applicant, while pressing the bail application, submitted that the Applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and is in judicial custody since 22.03.2026. It is contended that the Applicant is not named in the FIR and has subsequently been roped into the case without there being any credible evidence against him. It is further contended that there is an unexplained delay of three years in lodging the FIR. Learned counsel submits that neither has the Applicant forged any document nor received any amount from the complainant, and there is no evidence to suggest that the Applicant conspired in the alleged offence. It is also contended that no incriminating article relating to the present crime has been recovered from the possession of the Applicant and that he has no previous criminal antecedents. 6. Per contra, learned State Counsel opposed the bail application and contended that during the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer collected credible evidence against the accused-applicant in the form of statements of witnesses. It is further contended that the Applicant, by impersonation, cheated the complainant of an amount of Rs. 20 lakhs. 7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court finds that, considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, and without expressing any opinion on the merits thereof, the Applicant has been able to make out a fit case for grant of bail. 8. Accordingly, the Bail Application is allowed. 9. Let the Applicant be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned. 10. It is made clear that any observation made hereinabove is only for the purpose of adjudication of the present bail application and shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. 11. All pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of. (Ashish Naithani, J.) 21.05.2026 Shiksha