—1— IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 28i’[1 DAY OF MARCH, 2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE V. JAGANNATHAN CRL.P.NO. 10355/2011 Between: 1. B.Ganesh Roy S/o.Niranjain Roy, Age 25 years, 0cc.: Working as a foreman In BPSP Pvt. Ltd., Halkunda, Bellarv, R/ o. Surpur Village, Bijapur Post, Birbum Dist. W.B. 2. Biswajith Mandal S/o.Kamoram Mandal, Age 26 years, Working as a Supervisor in BPSDP Pvt. Ltd., Halkund, Bellarv, R/o.Nurpur, Ambagan, Hatrasulganj, Market Area, Surpur Post, Bribum Dist. W.B. Petitioners (By Sri.Amare Gouda, Advocate) And: State of Karnataka, Through Brucepet Police Station, By SPP. Circuit Bench, High Court Of Karnataka, Dharxvad. Respondent (B Sri. Anand Navalgimath, HCGP) This criminal petition is filed u/S.439 of Cr.P.C. seeking to allow this criminal petition and order for release the petitioners on bail in Crime No.92/2010, of Brucepet Police Station, which is registered p/u/s. 489(B) -2- This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court made the following: ORDER Heard the petitioners’ counsel and also the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent State in respect of the bail sought by the petitioners who are involved in the case punishable under Section 489(B) of the IPC. 2. The prosecution case in short is that, on 10.08.2010 the complainant was working as the Deputy Manager in State Bank of India, Station Road, Beflarv. It is alleged that the cashier of the Bank by name Sri.T.Srinivas Rao is said to have approached the complainant and told him that some unknown persons have approached him at about 12.20 p.m. in order to transfer a sum of Rs.25,000/- to account No.31032684437 and the said person deposited 40 notes of Rs.500/- denomination and 100 notes of Rs.50/- denomination and out of that, 40 notes of Rs.500/- denomination were found to be fake notes and in the course of the notes being examined, the said person ran away from the bank. The total value of the fake notes was Rs.7,000/-, -3- 3. Based on the complaint, a case was registered in Crime No.92/20 10 and after investigation, the petitioners were arrested and their sworn statements were recorded and fake notes were recovered from these petitioners. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the offence alleged is under Section 489(C) and therefore the petitioners be released on bail. 5. On the other hand, the learned High Court Government Pleader for the State, referring to the objections filed, submitted that these petitioners not only gave the amount to the cashier, but more fake notes were recovered from them and the investigation also includes the FSL report which says that 29 notes of Rs.500/- denomination seized were all found to be counterfeit notes. 6. Having thus heard both sides, in my view, the petitioners are not entitled for bail as the offence alleged is not only punishable with rigorous imprisonment, which may extend to 10 years, but the nature of the offence alleged is also against the interest of the State and its economy. .- -4- 7. The learned High Court Government Pleader for the State further submitted that the trial has to commence today and this is one more reason for not inclining to grant bail to the petitioner. Hence, petition is rejected. Sd! flJDGE