IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Original Jurisdiction Dated: Nainital : the 10th day of July, 2008 First Bail Application No. 424 of 2008 Order on the Bail Application: CRIMINAL SIDE Harpal Singh ……… Applicant / Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand …….. Respondent Arising out of Crime No. 858 of 2008 Under Sections: 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. Police Station: Ramnagar District : Nainital Hon’ble V.K. GUPTA, C. J. Smt. Pushpa Joshi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Nandan Arya, Assistant Government Advocate for the State. Counter affidavit has been filed, which I have carefully perused. I have also seen the documents accompanying the counter as well as other Annexures filed with the bail application. The clear allegations against the petitioner relate to the complainant being made to execute an agreement for sale as well as later on a sale-deed with respect to a property over which the petitioner and other co-accused had no title and actually, the property had already been washed out along the river-bed. The complainant was made to part with a huge amount of money by being induced to execute the aforesaid conveyances. The allegation against the petitioner are very serious in nature. I find it is not a fit case where the petitioner can be granted bail The bail application is rejected. 2 However, the petitioner will be at liberty to apply for bail in the trial Court after conclusion of the main prosecution evidence. If the petitioner does so, the learned trial Court at that stage (after main prosecution evidence is concluded) shall consider and dispose of his fresh bail application on its own merits in the light of the evidence adduced uptil that stage and uninfluenced by the passing of this order. (V. K. Gupta, C. J.) 10.07.2008 A