Cri. B.A. No.1015/22
1
Order
IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE
FOR GREATER MUMBAI AT MUMBAI
MHCC020056992022
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.1015 OF 2022
(CNR NO.MHCC02-005699-2022)
IN
SESSIONS CASE NO.439 OF 2022
(C.C. No.198/PW/2022)
Afaq Ahmed Ansar Ahmed Ansari
Aged: about 33 years, Occ.: Tailor ,
R/at : Village- Vasundhara, Post- Rijola,
Dist. Badhayu, Uttar Pradesh.

… Applicant
(Org. Accused No.6)
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
(At the instance of D.C.B. C.I.D. Unit-XI vide
C.R. No.06/2022).
(Dahisar Police Station, C.R. No.88/2022).
CORAM :
DATE :
… Prosecution
THE ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE
RAHUL R. BHOSALE (C.R. NO.55)
26.05.2022.

Learned Advocates:
Mr. Vijay Jha, for Applicant.
Mr. Abhijeet Gondwal, APP for State.
ORDER
Applicant- Afaq (original accused no.6) is facing the charge-sheet
for offences punishable u/Ss.489(A to C), 120-B, 34 of Indian Penal
Code (for short, ‘ IPC ’). He has filed this application for grant of bail u/
S.439 of Cr.P.C..
2.

Brief facts of the application are as under :
(a)
Applicant is noway concerned with the alleged crime.

Police did not recover any suspicious currency from the custody of
applicant. Nowhere prosecution gives any proof of intentional
Cri. B.A. No.1015/22
2
Order
involvement of the applicant in counterfeiting, trafficking and
possessing any suspicious currency. Basically, applicant came in search
of a job as called by accused no.3. The applicant is in fact a well
educated person working earlier as Chief Editor of Bulund Samachar.
He was also additionally doing tailoring work as all his family members
including old aged mother and infant daughter are depending upon
him. COVID Pandemic stripped him those earning sources, hence he
came to Mumbai in search of work. The applicant is thus noway
concerned with the instant crime.
(b)
Prosecution does not bring on record any material even
about the applicant was in telephonic contact with any of the accused
persons except accused no.3. Though, the laptop was seized from the
custody of applicant by police during investigation yet the charge-shet
does not reveal even when the PDF file containing images of currency
notes allegedly recovered was created. Therefore, the chances are found
roping-in applicant in the instant crime.
(c)
Prosecution has even not produced any material disclosing
that the applicant was present in the hotel room from which the
counterfeit currency purportedly amounting to Rs.2 Crore was seized.
The applicant is therefore, entitled for grant of bail in view of the
various rulings passed by superior Courts.
3.

Brief facts of the reply filed by prosecution are as under :
(a)
Accused nos.1 to 4 were apprehended in trap by police on
receiving confidential information. Accused nos.1 to 4 were going by a
car. The police team after arresting accused nos.1 to 4 took the search of
the car. They found a big bag containing 250 wads of 100 suspicious
currency notes each in the denomination of Rs.2000/- purportedly
amounting to Rs.5 Crore.

Cri. B.A. No.1015/22
(b)
3
Order
During investigation, police immediately approached to the
hotel where apprehended accused no.1 was staying alongwith his
friends. The police team found present applicant (accused no.6) and
accused nos.5 and 7 in the room no.106 at hotel AMFAHH in Andheri
West. Police found in search of that room, one black bag containing 100
wads of 100 suspicious currency notes each in the denomination of
Rs.2000/- purportedly amounting to Rs.2 Crore. Police arrested those
accused including applicant.
(c)
The Investigating Officer and prosecutor have commonly
replied at Ext.2 by reiterating the case of prosecution as aforesaid. They
have lastly prayed to reject the application as sufficient material is
found about involvement of the applicant in the present crime for which
punishment is provided of life imprisonment. The applicant if released
on bail, would continue to commit instant crime. Therefore, the
prosecution has prayed to reject the application.
4.

I have heard arguments of : Ld. Advocate Mr. Vijay Jha for
applicant and Ld. APP Mr. Abhijeet Gondwal for State and have also
perused the case papers. The points arise for my determination
accordingly are answered for reasons as under:
Sr. No.

Points
Findings
1.

Whether the applicant is entitled for
Negative.

grant of bail ?
2.

What is the order ?

As per final order.
REASONS
POINT NO.1:
5.

Present bail application is huge and gigantic presented in as much
as 63 pages. However, upon perusal of the present application and
particularly the reply of prosecution in the backdrop of entire material
Cri. B.A. No.1015/22
4
Order
in charge-sheet it is noticed that the accusations against present
applicant are quite similar with the accusations against accused no.5Pradeep. This Court has already rejected Cri. Bail Application
No.315/2022 on 13.05.2022 which was filed by said accused no.5Pradeep. Therefore, the present applicant was expected to give the
grounds for differentiating his case from the case of said accused no.5
for succeeding in the present application. Applicant in fact without
touching the said requirement has came with present huge application.
Still, for the sake of case of applicant let us scrutinize all the grounds
raised in the application.
6.

The applicant has relied upon decisions of Hon’ble Apex Court in
the cases of, Gudikanti Narasimhulu V/s. Public Prosecutor, (1978) 1
SCC 240; Sanjay Chandra V/s. CBI, (2012) 1 SCC 40; and Siddharam
Mhetre V/s. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694. The common
ruling contemplated as bail and not jail is the basic rule which has to be
kept in mind by the Courts dealing with grant of bail.
Of course, that is the basic binding law. However, when the
applicant is facing a serious charge of crime providing punishment of
life imprisonment then he has to prove bail application strictly under
S.439 r/w. S.437 of Cr.P.C.
7.

Ld. APP Mr. Gondwal has argued that, in first part of the
commission of alleged crime 4 accused persons including accused no.1Vasim were apprehended from a car by raiding police team. They were
carrying a bag containing purported currency of Rs.5 Crore in 250 wads
of 100 counterfeit currency notes each in the denomination of Rs.2000.
That currency prima-facie found due to its substandard quality as
counterfeited. All those suspicious currency notes bore same Sr. No. as
Cri. B.A. No.1015/22
5
Order
9 AQ 964813. He further submits that, immediately the police team
approached to the hotel AMFAHH where the prime accused no.1- Vasim
had stayed in room no.106. The police team found present applicant
alongwith accused nos.6 and 7 in that room and also they were found
possessing one black bag containing 100 wads of 100 suspicious
currency each in the denomination of Rs.2000/- purportedly amounting
to Rs.2 Crore. In counter, Ld. advocate Mr. Jha for applicant submits
that, even if that case of prosecution is taken a truth as it is then also
only S.489-C of IPC will be attracted for the alleged possession of such
counterfeit currency. That offence is bailable, therefore the applicant’s
advocate prays for grant of bail. However, the prosecution does not stop
here basing upon the material found in investigation about intentional
involvement of applicant in manufacturing and trafficking of huge
counterfeit currency also.
8.

For that purpose, the prosecution has relied upon statement of
witness- Rajnish who is the Manager of said AMFAHH hotel wherein the
applicant alongwith co-accused nos.5 and 7 was stayed in room no.106.
He verifies the association of applicant and those co-accused persons
staying with prime accused nos.1 to 4. Though, the applicant here has
tried to raise defence that, he came there only to meet accused no.3 for
service purpose yet his stay in said room does not justify same.
Moreover, that defence does not even specify about how and where
accused no.3 was arranging for the service of the applicant. Therefore,
said defence is not found probable. The applicant has repeatedly tried
to bring on record that, though such counterfeit currency was found in
the custody of present applicant and other accused persons yet the
applicant was neither aware of that fact nor he had any intention
behind the same. This case of applicant is also not found acceptable.

Cri. B.A. No.1015/22
6
Order
The simple reason is that, in the search of said room where applicant
alongwith co-accused persons stayed, the police team seized a laptop
from the custody of applicant. Police prepared detailed panchanama
dtd.26.01.2022 disclosing such laptop was seized by police from the
custody of applicant in presence of panchas. Again, the police recovered
a PDF file from the laptop of applicant upon receiving information from
him.

Its
detailed
panchanama
dtd.03.02.2022
discloses
that,
accordingly the police found that the applicant saved 8 images of 2
sides of the Indian currency in denomination of Rs.2000/-. It is the part
of record that the huge counterfeit currency found in the custody of
accused in a denomination of Rs.2000/- itself. It was admittedly of
substandard quality bearing same serial number.
9.

Applicant has weakly tried to refute that case of prosecution that
the chances of saving of such file by police on his laptop can not be
ruled out. But no any probable defence put-fourth by the applicant as to
why the police would act accordingly against him. Even otherwise also,
the concerned entire data and hard-disc of the laptop are seized by the
police. That factor can easily be find out during the trial. However, at
this stage it can not be denied that the images of Indian currency were
found saved in a PDF file in the laptop of applicant. Same is even
coupled with the custody of accused of the huge counterfeit currency
purportedly amounting to Rs.2 Crore then it can be easily concluded
that the applicant was quite aware of the said currency was counterfeit
as well as his active participation in counterfeiting said currency can not
be ruled out. The possession of such a huge purported currency of Rs.2
Crore itself brings on record the intention of possessors including
applicant would be of trafficking.

Cri. B.A. No.1015/22
10.

7
Order
As noticed earlier, accused persons were found in possession of
huge counterfeit currency purportedly amounting to Rs.7 Crore.
Applicant has come with the case that, he went to the said hotel room
as the accused no.2 called him for the service purpose where the coaccused persons were staying. But such case does not hold water when
it is evident that said accused no.2 was found trafficking huge
counterfeit currency of Rs.5 Crore at different places while the applicant
stayed in the hotel room possessing other huge chunk of counterfeit
currency. Therefore, it concludes that the applicant was also involved in
trafficking the counterfeit currency alongwith counterfeiting the same.
It is also the proof that all accused entered in criminal conspiracy in
furtherance of common intention of all. Such involvement of applicant
attracts major punishment of life imprisonment.
11.

The applicant is found involved in counterfeiting Indian Currency.

Such involvement of applicant would certainly affect the local financial
system. Severity of such activities of the accused will be affecting more
when economic condition of local financial system is already at wrake
due to on-going COVID-19 Pandemic. Therefore, the applicant is to be
dealt with sternly in the present situation. The deep involvement of
applicant also reveals that he will continue his unlawful activities
impairing the local financial system henceforth also. The amplification
of activities of huge racket of accused persons is far reaching also
influencing the prosecution witnesses thereby tampering will be
committed. All these aspects on the backdrop of applicant’s involvement
in crime attracting life imprisonment, would preclude the applicant
from grant of bail.
12.

The applicant has relied upon decision of Hon’ble High Court in
Cri. B.A. No.1015/22
8
Order
the case of, Deepak Hiralal Goplani V/s. State of Maharashtra, Criminal
Application Nos.1817 of 2009 and 1748 of 2009. Hon’ble High Court
has relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of,
Sanjay Chandra V/s. C.B.I. wherein it has been held that, the alleged
huge loss to the State exchequer that by itself should not deprive the
Appellants from relief of bail when there is no serious contention of the
Respondent that the accused if released on bail, would interfere with
the trial or tamper with evidence.
The facts in that case were relating to 2G Spectrum Scam. Those
facts and crime are altogether different than the facts and crime in the
present application. Here, the present applicant is already found
involved in commission of the crime affecting local financial system
attracting severe punishment of life imprisonment. It is already noticed
that, his release would not only cause tampering with evidence but also
continue further the incriminating activities. Hence, the applicant can
not base his case on that decision.
13.

Applicant has further relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Bombay
High Court in the case of, Karim Abdul Shaikh V/s. State of
Maharashtra, Criminal Appeal No.199/2016 wherein the reliance was
placed upon decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of, Umashanker.
Hon’ble Apex Court has observed that, without mens rea of selling,
buying or receiving from another person or otherwise trafficking in or
using as genuine forged or counterfeit currency-notes or bank notes, is
not enough to constitute offence under Section 489-B of I.P.C. Similar
on those grounds themselves S.489-C of I.P.C. will not be attracted.
However, those facts are different than facts in the present
application wherein it is already found that the applicant was knowing
possession of the counterfeit currency. Not only that, sufficient material
Cri. B.A. No.1015/22
9
Order
is found also about involvement of the applicant in counterfeiting the
currency is found.
14.

The applicant has relied upon decision of Hon’ble Bombay High
Court in the case of, Rahul Dinkar Vachkal V/s. The State of
Maharashtra, Criminal Bail Application No.1205/2020. Hon’ble High
Court released accused on bail by holding that, he was found only
possessing counterfeit currency which is a bailable offence u/S.489-C of
IPC.
Those facts are different than the facts in the present case
wherein the sufficient material is found about involvement of the
applicant in counterfeiting, trafficking and possessing the counterfeit
currency. This crime is non-bailable and coupling the life imprisonment.
15.

The applicant has further relied upon decision of Hon’ble Bombay
High Court in the cases of, Shuyeb Pasha @ Babu V/s. State, 2013 SCC
OnLine Kar 4162, Jadama Alagie V/s. State, 2013 SCC OnLine Kar
6330, Shubhankar Mandal V/s. State of Karnataka, 2019 SCC OnLine
Kar 1285 and Panna Lal Gupta V/s. State of Sikkim, 2010 Crl L J 825.
The common ruling is laid that, accused therein was found possessing
the counterfeit currency notes without any material of involvement of
accused persons in trafficking or counterfeiting the same. Therefore, in
the respective cases, the accused persons were released on bail.
Those facts are different than the facts in the present case
wherein the present applicant is found involved in the non-bailable
offence
attracting
the
life
imprisonment
for
trafficking
and
counterfeiting currency.
16.

The applicant has further relied upon decision of Hon’ble Apex
Cri. B.A. No.1015/22
10
Order
Court in the case of, C.B.I. V/s. K. Narayana Rao, (2012) 3 SCC (Cri)
1183. Hon’ble Apex Court has held that, the object of bail is neither
punitive nor penetrative. Deprivation of liberty must be considered a
punishment, unless it can be required to ensure that an accused person
will stand his trial when called upon. The Courts owe more than verbal
respect the principle that punishment begins after conviction, and that
every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried and duly found
guilty.
Those aspects certainly as per the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court
will be applicable to the case when prima-facie the applicant proves
entitlement for grant of bail. But in the present application not only the
involvement of the applicant in the non-bailable offence coupled with
life imprisonment is found but also it is evident that, applicant would
continue commission of such crime and also tamper with the evidence
of the prosecution. Thus, the applicant can not boost his case in the
light of that decision.
17.

The applicant has relied upon decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in
the case of, Mithilesh Tiwari V/s. Union of India, Criminal Appeal No.52
of 2021. Applicant points out that, Hon’ble Apex Court has held that, it
failed to understand why somebody should be kept incarcerated in a
case of GST evasion where most of the evidence would be documentary.
The facts in that case are not even similar to the facts in the
present case. The applicant therefore, can not boost his case basing on
that decision.
18.

The applicant has further relied upon decision of, Mohammad
Ahmed
Saddiqui
V/s.

State
of
Punjab,
MANU/PH/0266/2005
dtd.02.03.2005. Applicant points out that, Hon’ble Apex Court held
Cri. B.A. No.1015/22
11
Order
that, offender had a reason to believe that the currency notes were
forged or counterfeit or he has used those notes as a genuine one . The
applicant has also relied upon decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the
case of, Sanjay Chandra V/s. C.B.I. wherein Hon’ble Apex Court has
held that, there is no serious contention of the Respondent that the
accused if released on bail, would interfere with the trial or tamper
with evidence. No good reason was seen to detain the accused in
custody, that too, after the completion of the investigation and filing of
the charge-sheet.
Again, those decisions are based upon different set of facts. On
the contrary, in the present application, it is found that the applicant
was intentionally involved in commission of serious crime attracting the
life imprisonment. It is also found that, he would continue the alleged
unlawful activity affecting to the local financial system. Therefore, the
applicant can not boost his case basing on those rulings.
19.

The applicant has further relied upon decision of Hon’ble
Bombay High Court in the case of, Deepak Virendra Kochhar V/s.
Directorate of Enforcement & Ors., Criminal Bail Application No.1322 of
2020 and decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of, Arnab Goswami
V/s. State of Maharashtra & Ors., (2020) SCC OnLine SC 964. In first
decision the circumstances Hon’ble High Court found such that further
detention of applicant therein was not necessary. However, in the
present application the circumstances are different as noticed above,
hence that decision can not be attracted to the different set of facts
raised by present applicant here. In second decision, Hon’ble Apex
Court was scrutinizing the powers of Hon’ble High Court u/S.482 of
Cr.P.C. for passing orders necessary to give effect to the provisions of the
Cr.P.C.. Therefore, again those facts are different than the facts in
Cri. B.A. No.1015/22
12
Order
present case.
20.

In the present case, criminal conspiracy is clearly established
prima-facie in commission of offence of counterfeiting, trafficking and
possessing counterfeit currency. In the result, the applicant is not
entitled for grant of bail, hence I answer point no.1 in the negative.
POINT NO.2:
21.

The applicant has not succeeded to prove present bail application,
hence I pass the order as under :
ORDER
Criminal Bail Application No.1015 of 2022 of applicant- Afaq
Ahmed Ansar Ahmed Ansari is rejected.
Digitally signed
by RAHUL
RAHUL
RAMCHANDRA
RAMCHANDRA BHOSALE
BHOSALE
Date: 2022.06.01
11:45:58 +0530
Dated: 26.05.2022.

Dictated on
Typed on
Checked on
Signed on
:
:
:
:
26.05.2022.
27.05.2022.
30.05.2022.
01.06.2022.

(R.R. BHOSALE)
ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE
GREATER MUMBAI.

Cri. B.A. No.1015/22
13
Order
“ CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER”.
UPLOAD DATE
UPLOAD TIME
NAME OF
STENOGRAPHER
01.06.2022
11.40 a.m.

N.S. Bakre
Name of the Judge (With Court Room No. 55) HHJ Shri. R.R. Bhosale
Date of pronouncement of
JUDGMENT/ORDER
26.05.2022
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P.O. on
01.06.2022
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on
01.06.2022