IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Ist Bail Application No.499 of 2010 Order on the Bail application of accused. CRIMINAL SIDE Imamulhaq @ Salim S/o Sheikh Maeemuddin R/o Village Telva Siktoli Bihan, P.S. Nautan, District Betia (Bihar) ..….Applicant (In Jail) Versus State of Uttarakhand …….Opposite party Dated: May 10, 2010 Arising out of Case Crime No.56 of 2010 Under Sections 489A, 489B, 489C and 489E IPC P.S. Kotwali, District Dehradun Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Heard Mr. Sandeep Tandon, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Amit Bhatt, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and also perused the record. According to prosecution story on 11.2.2010, on receiving the information from the informant, the police arrested the applicant/accused and from his possession 8 counterfeit notes of Rs.1000/- denomination and 15 counterfeit notes of Rs.500/- denomination were recovered. Apart from above, 10 genuine notes of Rs.100 and 2 genuine notes of Rs.500 were also recovered from the possession of the applicant about which he told that he has exchanged these genuine notes from the shopkeepers in place of counterfeit notes. Learned counsel for the applicant/accused submitted that the applicant is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in the aforesaid case. It is further submitted that the applicant is citizen of Bihar and he has come Dehradun to earn his livelihood. Contrary to this, learned Addl. GA strongly opposed the bail application of the accused and argued that recovery of counterfeit notes has been made from his possession and he has used these counterfeit notes in the market. Keeping in view all the aforementioned facts and circumstances, gravity and seriousness of the crime, the Court is of the view that a prima facie case is made out against the applicant accused and, therefore, no case for bail is made out. The bail application is rejected accordingly. (Dharam Veer, J.) 10.05.2010 RG