HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32672 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. The pen-drive produced by the counsel for the applicant is taken on record. 3. Heard Sri Jitendra Kumar Shishodia, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ram Mohit Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.52 of 2025, under Sections 178, 179, 180, 181, 182, 61(2) B.N.S., Police Station Fugana, District Muzaffarnagar, during the pendency of trial. 5. As per prosecution story, recovery of heavy amount of fake currency of different denominations to the tune of Rs.15,16,000/- is stated to have been recovered from the possession of the applicant on 30.06.2025 at 11:20 a.m. At the time of recovery, several other implements used for printing the said fake currency were also recovered by the police. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that he has a pen-drive which contains the video regarding the fact that the applicant was taken away by the police on 28.06.2025 itself, as such, it is a clear-cut case of false implication. It is not possible or probable that a person shall carry fake currency alongwith the printer and other implements. The case is triable by Magistrate. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that the criminal Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Arvind Giri, Jitendra Kumar Shishodia, Swati Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Abhay Alias Tushar .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) history of one case assigned to the applicant stands explained. The applicant is languishing in jail since 30.06.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 9. The Supreme Court in Prabhakar Tewari vs. State of U.P. And Another, (2020) 11 SCC 648 has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail, if otherwise his case for bail is made out. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the fact that the applicant was taken into custody by the police on 28.06.2025 itself and subsequently he was implicated in the instant case, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima-facie the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant- Abhay Alias Tushar, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence during trial. (ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 13. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. (Krishan Pahal,J.) September 23, 2025 (Ravi Kant) BAIL No. 32672 of 2025 2 Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad