JUDGMENT : Z.K. Saiyed, J. Rule. Learned A.P.P. Ms. Chetna Shah waives services of Rule on behalf of the respondent-State. 2. The applicants have filed this Application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, for enlarging them on regular bail in connection with CR No.I-358 of 2008 registered with Odhav Police Station, Ahmedabad, for the offences punishable under Sections 489 (B) (C) and 114 of I.P. Code on 14.8.2008. 3. Earlier both the accused had filed bail application before this Court being Criminal Misc. Application No.15208 of 2008. At that time, this Court was not inclined to grant the same and therefore, it was withdrawn on 4.12.2008. Again both the accused – present applicants have filed this successive bail application in connection with the said offence. 4. Heard learned Advocate Mr. A.K. Thakur, appearing on behalf of the applicants and learned A.P.P. Ms. Chetna Shah, appearing on behalf of the respondent – State. 5. Learned Advocate Mr. Thakur has contended that the offence was registered on 14.8.2008 and both applicants–accused were arrested on the same day. He has further contended that from the applicant No.1 i.e. original accused No.1, 13 counterfeit notes of denomination of Rs.500/- and 6 counterfeit notes of denomination of Rs.100/- were recovered from the possession of the accused–applicant No.1. Similarly, from applicant–accused No.2–Lalanprasad, 10 counterfeit notes of denomination of Rs.500/- and counterfeit notes denomination of Rs.100/- were recovered. Thus, total 23 notes of denomination of Rs.500/- and 11 notes of the denomination of Rs.100/- were recovered from the accused persons. Out of which 23 notes of denomination of Rs.500/- were found counterfeit. He has also contended that both the applicants had filed Criminal Misc. Application before the Hon'ble Supreme Court being CRL.M.P. No.10390 and it was withdrawn on 21.7.2009. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has passed following order : "The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the special leave petition be dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh bail application in the High Court. As requested by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the Special leave petition is dismissed as withdrawn." 6. He has also contended that both the applicants–accused are young and they are falsely booked in the said offence. They have not committed any offence. As requested by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the Special leave petition is dismissed as withdrawn." 6. He has also contended that both the applicants–accused are young and they are falsely booked in the said offence. They have not committed any offence. Even the recovery and discovery of Muddamal is also doubtful and looking to the circumstances of the present case that till today, trial court is not commenced by the trial Court and he has also prayed that looking to the delay in the proceedings, both the accused are required to be released on bail. 7. Heard learned A.P.P. Ms. Chetna Shah for the State. She has vehemently argued from the police papers and contended that in this matter, the police has filed charge-sheet against the present applicants–accused and they are booked for the serious offence under Section 489(B)(C) read with 114 of the Indian Penal Code. She has also contended that from the Panchnama, it appears that the recovery of the counterfeit notes was such that any layman can easily find out that such notes are the counterfeit notes. She has also argued that looking to the discovery panchanma, from the applicant No.1–accused, 70 counterfeit notes of denomination of Rs.500/- were recovered from the residence of the accused persons, which is also proved on the record. She has also contended that the applicants – accused are real brothers and it was in their knowledge that the currency notes, which were carried by them, are counterfeit notes. She has read panchnama and papers as well as evidence and argued that both the applicants were arrested by the police, at the instance of the public in the market, when they were trying to encash counterfeits notes in the market. She has also contented that no lenient view is required to be taken in favour of such types of accused. 8. I have gone through the papers produced before me. I have also considered the submissions advanced by learned Advocates of both the sides. First of all, looking to the arrest panchnama of the accused, it appears that they were arrested at the instance of public (mob). They were trying to encash the counterfeit notes of denomination of Rs.500/-, which were recovered from accused No.1 – 13 notes of denomination of Rs.500/- and from accused No.2 – 10 notes of denomination of Rs.500/- were recovered. They were trying to encash the counterfeit notes of denomination of Rs.500/-, which were recovered from accused No.1 – 13 notes of denomination of Rs.500/- and from accused No.2 – 10 notes of denomination of Rs.500/- were recovered. I have perused discovery panchnama and in the circumstances, from the applicant No.1, more than 70 counterfeit notes of denomination Rs.500/- were recovered from the residence of applicants – accused. I have perused the nature of the counterfeit notes, which is mentioned in both the panchnamas. I have perused the police papers. The Police had obtained report from Reserve Bank of India on the same day. Even the FSL report is positive in favour of the prosecution. The circumstances under which the counterfeit notes were recovered and discovered from the possession of the applicants – accused, the manner in which the accused persons were carrying counterfeit notes and looking to the quantity of the notes, which found and recovered from the possession of the applicants – accused, all circumstances establish beyond the shadow of doubt that accused persons were carrying counterfeit notes and attempted to encash and therefore, intentionally and knowingly committed the offences as alleged. Prima facie, Mens rea of the accused persons is established in present case. I have perused the panchnama of recovery and discovery of the counterfeit notes. It is prima facie on record that so far as muddamal articles of counterfeit notes are concerned, those notes are of such nature, if anyone look at them, he would be convinced that the same are counterfeits notes. Thus, presumption regarding counterfeit notes can be drawn that the applicants very well knew that notes in their possession were counterfeit notes and knowingly they attempted to encash said notes. 9. Thus, presumption regarding counterfeit notes can be drawn that the applicants very well knew that notes in their possession were counterfeit notes and knowingly they attempted to encash said notes. 9. In the case of Prahlad Sing Bhati v. N.C.T. Delhi, reported in AIR 2001 SC 1444 , it is held by the Hon'ble Apex Court, as under : "While granting bail, the Court has to keep in mind - (a) the nature of accusations; (b) the nature of evidence in support, (c) the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail; (d) the character, behaviour, means and standing of the accused; (e) circumstances which are peculiar to the accused; (f) reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial; (g) reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with; (h) the larger interests of the public or State and similar other considerations. It has also to be kept in mind that for the purposes of granting bail, the Legislature has used the words "reasonable grounds for believing" instead of "the evidence" which means the Court while dealing with the application for the grant of bail should only satisfy itself as to whether there is a genuine and prima facie case against the accused and that the prosecution will be able to produce prima facie evidence in support of the charge. It is not expected at this stage, to have the evidence establishing the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt." 10. Now a days, due to vigil and watch by our police agency and armed force, large numbers of cases have been traced out apprehending number of accused persons carrying counterfeit notes in large scale. Such type of notorious activities at the hands of anti-social persons are on rampant and which directly affects economy of the nation. Not only that, but such notes are being used by the antisocial/terrorists for waging war against the nation. Such activities tampers and destroy the economy system of the nation and therefore, I am in full agreement with the submissions made by the learned A.P.P. Ms. Shah. This is a serious offence and offenders like the applicants, are waging war against the nation. I am of the opinion that in such type of serious offence, bail application is required to be dealt with seriously and lenient view cannot be taken in such a serious offence. Shah. This is a serious offence and offenders like the applicants, are waging war against the nation. I am of the opinion that in such type of serious offence, bail application is required to be dealt with seriously and lenient view cannot be taken in such a serious offence. It is found from the papers that if in such type of case, if the bail application is allowed, then wrong signal will go to the society. From the above observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Prahlad Sing Bhati v. N.C.T. Delhi, I am not in agreement with the submissions made by the learned advocate for the applicants. Prima facie, case is of serious offence is made out against both the accused persons, and therefore, in the larger interest of society and nation as well, present application requires to be rejected. Further, the accused have also not shown any change in circumstances for ground of bail, only because the applicants are of young age, alone would be no ground to exercise discretion in favour of the applicants. 11. In view of above, this application is rejected. Rule is discharged. Application rejected.