2026:UHC:3215 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS BA1/1925/2025 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Bilal Ahmed, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. V.S. Pal, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. Applicant–Baleshwar, who is in judicial custody in connection with Case Crime/F.I.R. No. 230 of 2025, under Sections 179, 180, 181 of B.N.S. registered at Police Station Kotwali Roorkee, District Haridwar, has sought his release on bail. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on 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 applicant was apprehended with forged currency notes. It is further alleged that the accused, pointed out the fake currency notes to the informant. 6. It is alleged that the police apprehended the applicant and allegedly recovered two bundles of fake currency notes of ₹500/- denomination totalling ₹1,00,000/-from his possession. Thereafter, the applicant was arrested and interrogated. It is stated that during interrogation, the police proceeded to the rented accommodation of the applicant, where two co-accused persons were found counting fake currency notes along with chemicals, glass sheets, and an HP Ink Tank 316 Printer. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant 2026:UHC:3215 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 applicant was 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 and this Court vide judgment and order dated 28.11.2025 granted regular bail to the co-accused persons, namely, Manish Kumar and Himanshu. He submits that the charge sheet has been filed; there is no likelihood of his tampering with evidence; that, the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated; he is in judicial custody since 28.06.2025; and his bail application was rejected on 09.10.2025 by the court below; that, the trial will take considerable time to conclude, and therefore, the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail during pendency of the trial. 9. Per contra, learned State Counsel would vehemently oppose the bail application. However, he concedes that the applicant is in judicial custody since 28.06.2025 and that anticipatory bail has been granted to the co-accused person by the Coordinate Bench of this Court and regular bail has been granted to co-accused Manish Kumar by this Court vide judgment and order dated 28.11.2025. 10. 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 2026:UHC:3215 that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail on the following grounds: (a) The applicant shall execute a personal bond and furnish two reliable sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. (b) The applicant shall cooperate with the investigating agency and he shall make himself available for interrogation by police officer as and when required; (c) If the charge-sheet is filed, the applicant shall attend the trial court regularly and he shall not seek any unnecessary adjournment: (d) Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person, acquainted with the facts of the case; (e) Applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the trial court. 11. 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 applicant is found to have misused the liberty granted to him. 12. Bail application is, accordingly, allowed. (Alok Mahra, J.) 28.04.2026 Mamta 2026:UHC:3215