2025:UHC:10620 SL. No. Dat e Office Not es, r epor t s, or der s or pr oceedin gs or dir ect ion s an d Regist r ar ’s or der w it h Sign at u r es COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1 / 1 3 8 9 / 2 0 2 5 W it h BA1 / 1 3 9 0 / 2 0 2 5 Mr. Lalit Sharma, Mr. Bilal Ahmed and Mr. Yogesh Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the applicants. 2. Mr. Deepak Bisht, learned Deputy A.G. along with Mr. Devender Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. Applicants–Manish Kumar and Himanshu, who are in judicial custody in connection with Case Crime/F.I.R. No. 230 of 2025, registered under Sections 179, 180, and 181 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.) at Police Station Kotwali Roorkee, District Haridwar, have sought their release on bail. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. As per the prosecution case, an F.I.R. was lodged by the Sub-Inspector/informant alleging that, acting on specific information, he conducted vehicle checking in the concerned area, during which the applicants were apprehended with forged currency notes. It is further alleged that one accused, Baleshwar @ Bali, pointed out the fake currency notes to the informant. 6. It is alleged that the police apprehended the applicants and allegedly recovered four bundles of fake currency notes of ₹500/- denomination totalling ₹2,00,000/-from the possession of the co- accused. Thereafter, the applicants were arrested and interrogated. It is stated that during interrogation, the police proceeded to the rented accommodation of the applicants, where two co-accused persons were found counting fake currency notes along with chemicals, glass sheets, and an HP Ink 2025:UHC:10620 Tank 316 Printer. 7. Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the Investigating Officer has filed the charge sheet under Sections 179, 180, and 181 B.N.S. in a routine and mechanical manner, and that Section 179 B.N.S. is not attracted, as the applicants were not apprehended while using the fake currency; rather, the alleged recovery was made from a rented premises. He further submits that there is an unexplained delay in lodging the F.I.R., which was registered on 28.06.2025 despite the alleged incident occurring on 27.06.2025. 8. Learned counsel further submits that a Coordinate Bench of this Court has already granted anticipatory bail to the co-accused vide orders dated 26.09.2025 and 09.10.2025. He submits that the charge sheet has been filed; the applicants are permanent residents of District Haridwar; there is no likelihood of their tampering with evidence or fleeing from justice; the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated; they have been in custody since 28.06.2025; and their earlier bail application was rejected on 24.07.2025. It is argued that the trial will take considerable time to conclude, and therefore, the applicants deserve to be enlarged on bail during pendency of the trial. 8. Per contra, learned State Counsel would vehemently oppose the bail application. However, he concedes that the applicants are in judicial custody since 28.06.2025 and that anticipatory bail has been granted to the co-accused by the Coordinate Bench of this Court. 9. Having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of both sides and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicants are entitled to be released on bail on the following grounds: 2025:UHC:10620 (a) The applicant shall execute a personal bond and furnish two reliable sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court. (b) The applicants shall cooperate with the investigating agency and they shall make themselves available for interrogation by police officer as and when required; (c) If the charge-sheet is filed, the applicants shall attend the trial court regularly and they shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment: (d) Applicants shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person, acquainted with the facts of the case; (e) Applicants shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the trial court. 10. It is made clear that the bail granted to the applicant shall be liable to be cancelled in the event of any violation of the aforesaid conditions or if the applicants are found to have misused the liberty granted to them. 11. Bail applications are, accordingly, allowed. ( Alok Mahr a, J.) 28.11.2025 Mamta