Uttarakhand High Court
Aakash Saxena vs State Of Uttarakhand on 12 March, 2026
Author: Alok Kumar Verma
Bench: Alok Kumar Verma
2026:UHC:1647
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA
12th MARCH, 2026
FIRST BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2505 of 2025
Aakash Saxena .....Applicant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand .....Respondent
Counsel for the Applicant : Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate.
Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, Assistant
Government Advocate.
Hon'ble Alok Kumar Verma,J.
Applicant - Aakash Saxena is in judicial custody for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 111(3), 351(2) and Section 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in Case Crime No.415 of 2025, registered at Kotwali Gangnahar, District Haridwar.
2. In short, the allegations in the First Information Report dated 27.08.2025 are that a fake power of attorney deed was created and showed that the said power of attorney deed was executed by one Rekha. Thereafter, sale- deed of two plots was executed on the basis of the said forged power of attorney deed.
3. Heard Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned Assistant Government Advocate for the respondent.
4. Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate, contended that the 1 2026:UHC:1647 applicant has been falsely implicated in the present matter. He is not a member of any Gang. He did not threaten to anyone. He has no criminal antecedents. He did not execute the power of attorney deed. He is not the witness to the power of attorney deed. The sale-deed was not executed by him. He is only a witness to the said sale-deed. The said registered power of attorney deed was not cancelled at the time of the execution of the sale-deed. Applicant is a permanent resident of District Haridwar, therefore, there is no possibility of his absconding. Manish alias Bolar, Hasan Abbas Jaidi and Sher Singh, these three co-accused, have already been granted regular bail by this Court, and, applicant is in custody since 05.12.2025.
5. Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, Assistant Government Advocate, has opposed the bail application.
6. Bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception. Refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The object of keeping the accused in detention during the investigation or trial is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused.
7. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, no reason is found to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, therefore, 2 2026:UHC:1647 without expressing any opinion as to the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage.
8. The Bail Application is allowed.
9. Let the applicant - Aakash Saxena be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
___________________ ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.
Dt: 12.03.2026 Shiv/ 3