news details |
|
|
| Fake currency accused denied bail | | | Early Times Reporter
Jammu | Jan 8
Chief Judicial Magistrate Jammu Mr. Sanjeev Gupta rejected bail application of Hilal Ahmed Bhat involved in fake counter-fit currency racket, who was arrested by the police.
On December 14, 2007on a specific information regarding involvement of the accused Hilal Ahmed Bhat in counter-fit currency racket, a case was registered and accused was apprehended by the police Bagani Talab Jammu and recovered 45 notes of counter-fit currency of 1000 denomination (total Rs 45000) from his possession with currency notes of Rs 50. The accused could not explain his position pertaining to the fake counter fit currency notes; therefore, he was taken into custody. It further appears that father of the accused Assadullah Bhat was the main kingpin in pumping counter fit currency notes in the country in association with some other anti-national elements and apart from accused Hilal Ahmed Bhat, Asadullah Bhat has associated some other persons in the racket in order to use as genuine the forged currency notes. According to the CPO MA Manhas appearing for the state that during the investigation of the case two persons namely Bashir Ahmed and Mohd Rafiq both resident of Qazigund Kashmir, at present Poonch, and father of Hilal Ahmed accused are actively involved in the business of circulating counter-fit currency notes in Jammu area.
While rejecting the bail application, CJM further observed that allegations against the accused are no doubt very serious in nature in as much as his role in the crime, his prima-facie made out as not only counter-fit currency notes were recovered from his possession but investigation done so far in the case also reveals that he has nexus with the other persons including his father involved in the pumping of fake currency notes in the country. Thus the nature of allegations and severity of punishment in case of conviction nature of supporting evidence in the CD file or of such nature which goes to on show that accused is not entitled to grant to bail. Moreover, personal liberty can be enjoyed but not at the cost of moral, norms and values of the society and if such liberty violates public policy and the offence committed by the accused he is not only against the society as whole of country, then Court is required to curb such personal liberty with an iron hand . With these observations Court rejected the bail of accused. JNF |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
