Judgment : 1. The petitioners who are alleged to have committed offences punishable under Secs.489-B and 489-C, were arrested on 30.8.2012 with reference to Cr.No.435 of 2012 on the file of the respondent police, seek bail. 2. The case of the prosecution is that one Mrs.Muthu, W/o Raman was operating a Savings Bank Account with Karur Vysya Bank Ltd., Krishnagiri Branch and she availed a jewel loan for a sum of Rs.10000/-on 17.6.2011. On 18.5.2012 she remitted a sum of Rs.10200/- towards the closure of jewel loan in the denomination of twenty 500 rupees notes and two 100 rupees notes. All the twenty 500 rupees notes were found to be fake notes. On a complaint given by the Manager, the present case was registred for the alleged offence stated above. 3. Investigation revealed that the said Mrs.Muthu received the said amount from one Rajammal, who is the President of a Self Help Group. According to witnesses, the latter obtained the amount from Bank of Baroda, Vepannapalli Branch and the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No, 22781 of 2012 (Rangaraj) was the Cashier, who gave Rs.70000/-, out of which Rs.50,000/- were fake currency notes which was remitted by the petitioner in Crl.OPNo.22049 of 2012 (Kaleel). Therefore, the Cashier and the person, who deposited the money, were arrested and remanded to judicial custody and they are before this Court, seeking bail. 4. Mr.R. Gandhi, learned Senior counsel, who is appearing for Mr.R.G. Narendran, learned counsel appeared in Crl.O.P.No.22049 of 2012 submitted that the petitioner is a law abiding citizen who owns JCB Excavator for his livelihood and there is no evidence to show that he has deposited Rs.50000/-at Bank of Baroda which is said to be fake currency notes. He pointed out that in any event he was not in possession of counterfeit notes and only on the confession of co-accused he has been implicated and he is in custody for the last one month. 5. Similarly, Mr.E.Kannadasan, learned counsel for the Petitioner in Crl.O.P.No 22781 of 2012 would also submit that the petitioner is only the Cashier in Bank of Baroda who has been dealing with cash daily and there is no tangible evidence against him. 6. 5. Similarly, Mr.E.Kannadasan, learned counsel for the Petitioner in Crl.O.P.No 22781 of 2012 would also submit that the petitioner is only the Cashier in Bank of Baroda who has been dealing with cash daily and there is no tangible evidence against him. 6. On the contrary, Mr.K. Prabhakaran, learned Government Advocate submits that it is a case of 'fake currency racket' which involves National and International players and opposed granting of bail stating that the investigation is at the initial stage. 7. Heard and perused the materials availabe on record. 8. According to the prosecution, A.1, one Anniya Chetti, who is the king-pin had circulated the counterfeit notes and from the said Annia Chetti, A.2 the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.22049 of 2012 received them, who inturn, deposited the same with A.3, the petitioner in Crl.O.P.No.22781 of 2012. Even according to the prosecution, the petitioners were not found to be in possession when the fake currencies were seized. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances and that the involvement of the petitioners is only based on the confession, and the period of custodial interrogation is over, no prejudice would be casued to the prosecution if the petitioners are released on bail. 10. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on each of them executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties each for the likesum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Krishnagiri and the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.00 a.m for 15 days.