1 CA-4857.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE  CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4857 OF 2010 Abdul Kalam Nabiraham Shah .... Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra .... Respondent Shri Sherali S. Khan for the Applicant. Ms P.H. Kantharia, APP, for the State. CORAM: R.C. CHAVAN, J. DATED: NOVEMBER 29, 2010 P.C: This is an application for bail by a person who has been charge-sheeted by the police for his alleged involvement in counterfeiting currency notes and also using those notes. The applicant claims to be a timber merchant. He had purchased some timber from one Santosh. The applicant handed over the consideration amount of Rs.1,20,000/- in currency notes of the denomination of Rs.500/- to one Azam and Azam, in turn, paid it to the vendor. In the course of the investigation, the applicant led the police party to a printer which was in possession of one Sharad Trivedi, who has been admitted to bail by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge. The learned counsel for the applicant states that, first, the applicant has not used the counterfeit currency notes and 2 CA-4857.10 it is Azam who could be said to have used the counterfeit currency notes and secondly, the printer has been seized from the possession of Trivedi who has been admitted to bail and, therefore, the applicant may be released on bail. As rightly pointed out by the learned APP, there is a statement of one Subhash Chandra which shows that it was the applicant who had handed over the counterfeit currency notes. In any case, there is some further evidence about seizure of paper which tallies with the paper on which the notes have been printed. The other arguments which the learned counsel advances would have to be tested at the trial since they pertain as to whether the police officer could have or could not have conducted the panchnamas at the hours at which they have been conducted. Considering the involvement of the applicant in the making of counterfeit currency notes, the application for bail is rejected. The learned trial Judge shall conduct the trial of the applicant's case uninfluenced by the observations made in this order and shall expedite the hearing of the case having due regard to the older custody cases pending before him. (R.C. CHAVAN, J.)