IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL - AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 26561 of 2025 ========================================================== RAKESHKUMAR (RASKESHKUMAR) BHAGWAN RAM Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ========================================================== Appearance: MR SACHINKUMAR G AGRAWAL(13222) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MS SHRUTI PATHAK, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 20/01/2026 ORAL ORDER 1. RULE. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent-State. 2. The present successive bail application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) for regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.11191007240519 of 2024 registered with Bapunagar Police Station, Ahmedabad City, for the offences punishable under Sections 178(1), 179, 180, 61, 54 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNS”). 3. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that the applicant has no connection with the alleged offence and has been falsely implicated. The applicant has been in judicial custody since 12.10.2024, and till date there has been no substantial progress in the trial. The present applicant has been implicated in the offence solely on the statement of the co- p. 2 accused, whereas he was not involved in any printing or circulation of counterfeit currency and did not play any active role in the alleged offence. The applicant has no past antecedents, and if he is not released on bail, his family would face starvation. Nothing is required to be recovered or discovered from the present applicant. It is further submitted that, considering the nature of the offence, the applicant may be granted regular bail by imposing suitable conditions. 4. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed the grant of regular bail, considering the nature and gravity of the offence. It is submitted that the present applicant is actively involved in the offence and that his presence is also reflected in the CCTV footage. The present applicant acted as a middleman and was in constant contact with one Rafik, who is yet to be arrested. The conductor of the travels company has identified the present applicant and stated that he was travelling along with the said Rafik. It is further alleged that Rafik used to send fake currency through the travels company, and the counterfeit parcels were received by the present applicant, who thereafter handed them over to one Indrabhushan. Hence, prima facie involvement of the present applicant is established. Merely because the applicant has been arraigned as an accused on the statement of a co-accused does not dilute the case, as ample material is available on record indicating his involvement in the offence. It is further submitted that a money transfer trail has also been found in the bank account of Rafik. In view of the above, the role of the present p. 3 applicant and his involvement in the offence are clearly established. Therefore, the present application deserves to be dismissed. 5. While granting bail, the Court has to consider the involvement of the accused in the alleged offence, the jurisdiction to grant bail has to be exercised on the basis of the well settled principles having regard to the facts and circumstances of each case and the following factors are to be taken into consideration while considering an application for bail: (i) the nature of accusation and the severity of the punishment and the nature of the materials relied upon by the prosecution; (ii) reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses and threat to the complainant or the witnesses; (iii) reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the time of trial or the likelihood of his abscondence; (iv) character behaviour and standing of the accused and the circumstances which are peculiar to the accused; (v) larger interest of the public or the State and similar other considerations are required to be considered. 6. I have heard the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and perused the investigation papers. Following aspects have been considered: (1) The applicant has been in judicial custody since 12.10.2024, and till date there has been no substantial progress in the trial. The present applicant has been implicated in the offence solely on the statement of the co- p. 4 accused; (2) Investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed; (3) Upon perusal of the FIR, it appears that the present applicant has been arraigned as Accused No. 2. It is alleged that on 12.10.2024, Accused No. 1, namely Indrabhushan Tripathi, was caught red-handed with counterfeit currency, and that the said counterfeit currency belonged to the present applicant (Accused No. 2), who was allegedly aware that the currency was fake and nonetheless used it as genuine and circulated it in the market. However, from the conscious possession of Accused No. 1, seven counterfeit currency notes of Rs.500 denomination and 529 counterfeit currency notes of Rs.100 denomination were recovered. Nothing has been recovered or discovered from the present applicant which would connect him with the alleged counterfeit currency notes; (4) It is alleged that the present applicant formed part of the chain in the circulation of the said counterfeit currency. The allegation against him is that he received a parcel sent by the absconding co-accused Rafik and, in turn, handed it over to Accused No. 1; however, there is no specific material on record to indicate that the present applicant was aware that the currency contained in the parcel was counterfeit. Even otherwise, the mere fact that the co-accused Rafik is absconding cannot, by itself, be a ground to refuse bail to the present applicant; (5) The applicant has no past antecedents and now, nothing p. 5 is required to be discovered or recovered from the accused and there is no possibility of the trial taking place in the near future; 7. This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra vs. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in [2012]1 SCC 40 as well as in the case of Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors vs. Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in (1978)1 SCC 240. Obviously, the conclusion of trial will take time and keeping the accused behind the bars is nothing but amounts to pre-trial conviction and therefore, considering the celebrated principle of bail jurisprudence is that “bail is a rule and jail is exception” as well as the concept of personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, present application deserves consideration. 8. In the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the nature of the allegations made against the applicant/s in the FIR, without discussing the evidence in detail, prima facie, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicant/s on regular bail. Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicants is/are ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No.11191007240519 of 2024 registered with Bapunagar Police Station, Ahmedabad City on executing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five Thousand only) with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that he shall; p. 6 (a) not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty; (b) not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution & shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and shall not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police; (c) surrender passport, if any, to the Trial Court within a week; (d) not leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission of the Trial Court concerned; (e) mark presence before the concerned Police Station once in a week till the trial is over between 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m.; (f) furnish the UIDAI Number, Contact Number/s, Passport Number (if he is having the passport), E-mail address and present address of his residence to the Investigating Officer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence without prior permission of Trial Court; (g) not indulge in any illegal activity or any similar type of offence. If the applicant is found in any illegal activity or any similar type of activity, then, concerned Investigating Officer shall have liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail against the present applicant. In case of breach of any conditions, the concerned Trial Court shall have liberty to cancel the bail of the present applicant; 9. The authorities will release the applicant/s only if he is not required in connection with any other offence for the time being. p. 7 If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter. 10. Bail bond to be executed before the lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case. It will be open for the concerned Court to delete, modify and/or relax any of the above conditions, in accordance with law. 11 At the trial, the trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations of preliminary nature qua the evidence at this stage made by this Court while enlarging the applicant/ on bail. 12. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted. (HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) ALI