news details |
|
|
| Court rejects bail of four in fake currency note scam | | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, Apr 15: CJM Jammu Amarjeet Singh Langeh rejected the bail applications of four accused involved in fake currency note scam.
While rejecting the bail applications of Rajesh Ganjoo, Vipan Pandita, Rohit Sharma and Sachin Kumar, CJM observed that the evidence collected during the ongoing investigation would show that investigation into this racket of preparation and circulation of fake and counterfeit currency came to spotlight not on the basis of tip-off that concerned police received but on the basis of formal complaint which complainant lodged with the police after a fake currency note of Rs 500 was tendered to him by accused Sachin Kumar and Rohit Sharma against purchase of commodity (cigarettes) from his shop. During further investigation, it came to fore that there are other accused Vipan Pandita and Rakesh Ganjoo who indulged in the preparation of fake currency notes of various denominations and thereafter put the same into circulation through likes of accused Sachin Kumar and Rohit Sharma. Not only fake currency notes were recovered from accused Vipan Pandita as aforesaid but necessary material and apparatus used for preparation of this fake currency also seems to have been recovered from accused Rakesh Ganjoo. The evidence collected during investigation therefore un-haltingly suggests that the four accused who are petitioners herein are dramatise-personae (vital characters) in this entire process of making/preparation of fake currency notes and thereafter putting the same to circulation amongst innocent and unsuspecting public at large for their personal gains.
CJM Jammu Amarjeet Singh Langeh observed that thus, having regard to the evidence showing prima facie involvement of petitioners/accused in the commission of offences under sections 489-B, 489-D and 120-B of IPC, the nature and gravity of the allegations, severity of the punishment that the offences carry (the punishment for offences under sections 489-B and 489-D of IPC is up to life imprisonment) and considering the far reaching impact on public at large of the allegations alluded to petitioners, I am of the considered opinion that no case for grant of bail is made out by petitioners at this stage more particularly when the investigations is still under-going and many vital aspects thereof are yet to be addressed. With these observations, Court rejected the bail applications.
—JNF |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
