Uttarakhand High Court
Manish Alias Bolar vs State Of Uttarakhand on 25 February, 2026
Author: Alok Kumar Verma
Bench: Alok Kumar Verma
2026:UHC:1277
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR VERMA
25th FEBRUARY, 2026
FIRST BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1907 of 2025
Manish alias Bolar .....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 – Manish alias Bolar is in judicial
custody for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467,
468, 471, 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections
111, 351 and Section 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023 in Case Crime No.415 of 2025, registered at Kotwali,
District Haridwar.
2. As per the First Information Report dated
27.08.2025, the applicant and the co-accused persons
created a fake power of attorney deed and showed that the
said 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:1277
applicant is not a member of any Gang. He did not threaten
to anyone. There were four other criminal cases registered
against him. He has been acquitted in three criminal cases
and he is on bail in another criminal case. Applicant did not
execute the power of attorney deed. He is not the witness
to the alleged Power of Attorney deed. The alleged sale-
deed was not executed by him. He is not the witness to the
said sale-deed. He is a permanent resident of District
Haridwar, therefore, there is no possibility of his
absconding. Charge-sheet has already been filed, therefore,
there is no chance of tampering with the evidence, and, the
applicant is in custody since 28.08.2025.
5. Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, Assistant Government
Advocate, has opposed the bail application. He submitted
that the informant was threatened by the applicant.
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 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:1277
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 – Manish alias Bolar 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 with the following conditions:-
(i) Applicant shall attend the trial court regularly
and he shall not seek any unnecessary
adjournment; and,
(ii) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make
any inducement, threat or promise to the
informant or to any person, acquainted with the
facts of this case.
___________________
ALOK KUMAR VERMA, J.
Dt: 25.02.2026
Pant /
3
