JUDGMENT : Ravindra Maithani, J. Delay Condonation Application No. 2 of 2024 is allowed. Delay in filing counter affidavit is condoned. Counter affidavit is taken on record. 2. Applicant Prem Singh is in judicial custody in FIR No. 70 of 2023, under Section 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC, Police Station Dineshpur, District Udham Singh Nagar. He has sought his release on bail. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 4. This is second bail application of the applicant. First bail application of the applicant was dismissed as withdrawn on 28.12.2023. 5. According to the FIR, the co-accused introduced two persons as his relatives to the bank. Those persons applied for a loan; loan was given; but subsequently, it was revealed that the loan was taken on the forged documents and by impersonation. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant is not a beneficiary of any loan; there has been no test identification parade; merely because his photo was pasted on the loan documents, he has been implicated in the case; he did not sign any document. 7. On the other hand, learned State counsel would submit that the loan was taken in the name of one Anoop Singh and Gurdev Kaur by impersonation. Anoop Singh stays in Canada, whereas, Gurdev Kaur had died long back in the year 2019. It is argued that, in fact, the applicant did appear as a guarantor by impersonating Kulveer Singh and he executed those documents. He has referred to the statement of the informant, who has stated that, in fact, the applicant has also requested her to withdraw the case. 8. It is a stage of bail. Much of the discussion is not expected of. Arguments are being appreciated with the caveat that any observation made in this order shall have no bearing at any subsequent stage of the trial or in any other proceedings. 9. It is a case of cheating the financial institution. Loan was taken by impersonation in the name of a person, who had died long back. The role of the applicant is much involved in the case. He stood as a guarantor i.e. by impersonation another person Kulveer Singh. 10. Having considered, this Court is of the view that there is no ground to enlarge the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 11. The role of the applicant is much involved in the case. He stood as a guarantor i.e. by impersonation another person Kulveer Singh. 10. Having considered, this Court is of the view that there is no ground to enlarge the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application deserves to be rejected. 11. The bail application is rejected.