IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 18TH KARTHIKA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 8710 of 2011 CRIME NO.514 OF 2009 OF CHADAYAMANGALAM POLICE STATION CR.207/CR/S1/2009 CBCID OCW.1 SUB UNIT, KOLLAM. PETITIONER : ACCUSED NO.1 -------------------------------- NOUSHAD, S/O. MUHAMMED ILLIKKAL HOUSE, AMARAMBALAM VILLAGE, NILAMBOOR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI. K.SIJU SRI.S.ABHILASH RESPONDENT: STATE -------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY DETECTIVE INSPECTOR, CBCID OCW-1, SUB UNIT, KOLLAM, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.R.RANJITH THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/11/2011, ALONG WITH BA NO.8719 OF 2011 AND BA NO. 8722 OF 2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ Bail Appl.NOS.8710, 8719 & 8722 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 9th day of November, 2011 O R D E R In all these cases, the petitioner is the same person and therefore, these Bail Applications are considered and disposed of by this common order. These Bail Applications are filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. The cases were registered as Crime No.514 of 2009 of Chadayamangalam Police Station, Crime No.200 of 2008 of Kottarakkara Police Station and Crime No.420 of 2007 of Palode Police Station against the petitioner and others. The investigation was handed over to the Crime Branch and the Crimes have been renumbered as CBCID CR.207/CR/S1/2009, CBCID Cr.58/CR/S1/2008 and CBCID Cr.23/CR/S1/2008. 3. The offences alleged against the accused are under Sections 420, 489B and 489C read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. BAIL APPL. NOS.8710, 8719 AND 8722 OF 2011 :: 2 :: 4. In Cr.No.207/CR/S1/2009, the allegation is that on 21.7.2009, the accused purchased two goats from the defacto complainant for a sum of `9,500/- and paid the amount, out of which, nine currency notes of the denomination of `1,000/- and five currency notes of the denomination of `100/- were found to be counterfeit currency notes. The formal arrest of the petitioner was recorded on 16.9.2011. 5. In Cr.No.58/CR/S1/2008, the allegation is that on 21.2.2008, the accused purchased three goats from the defacto complainant for a sum of `6,400/- and paid thirteen counterfeit currency notes of the denomination of `500/-. The formal arrest of the petitioner was recorded on 5.9.2011. 6. In Cr.No.23/CR/S1/2008, the allegation is that on 19.11.2007, the accused purchased two goats from the defacto complainant for a sum of `5,300/- and paid 53 counterfeit currency notes of the denomination of `100/-. The formal arrest of the petitioner was recorded on 5.9.2011. BAIL APPL. NOS.8710, 8719 AND 8722 OF 2011 :: 3 :: 7. The offences alleged against the petitioner are grave in nature. The dates on which the offences were alleged to have been committed would indicate that the petitioner is involved in several cases during various periods. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner is involved in other crimes of similar nature as well. 8. The menace of circulation of counterfeit currency notes has been highlighted in the decisions in Siraj v. Station House Officer (2009 (4) KLT SN 70 Case No.63) and Ahammed E.P.v. State of Kerala and another (2010 (1) KHC 771). 9. If the petitioner is released on bail there is every chance of the petitioner involving himself in similar criminal activities. I do not find any ground to grant bail to the petitioner. For the aforesaid reasons, these Bail Applications are dismissed. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/