JUDGMENT 1. The applicant has filed this first application under section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. 2. The applicant has been arrested by Police Station Thatipur, Gwalior, in connection with Crime No.27/2020 registered in relation to the offences punishable under sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the IPC. 3. Allegations against the applicant, in short, are that he along with other co-accused persons was involved in procuring forged GNM markesheet for co-accused Mamta Mittal, on the strength of which, she was able to get a Government job as a contractual Staff Nurse. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated on the basis of memorandum of coaccused Mamta recorded under section 27 of the Evidence Act. He is in custody since 3/3/2020. He is not named in the FIR. He is a Government servant aged about 55 years working as UDC. The money in question was transferred from the account of applicant to co-accused Devendra Balmik through cheque for some different purpose and the same has nothing to do with the marksheet issued in favour of Mamta. Attention has also been invited to the guidelines issued to all the States and Union Territories by the Apex Court for de-congesting the prisons in suo motu W.P. (C) No. 1/2020 (IN RE : CONTAGION OF COVID 19 VIRUS IN PRISONS) to consider release of prisoners who have been convicted or are under trial for offences for which prescribed punishment is up to 7 years or less by constituting a High Powered Committee. Applicant is a permanent resident of Gwalior and there is no likelihood of her absconsion or tampering with the prosecution evidence. With the aforesaid submissions, prayer for grant of bail is made. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application and prayed for its rejection by contending that on the basis of the allegations and the material available on record, no case for grant of bail is made out. It is submitted that the applicant acted as a middleman by transferring money to the co-accused for procuring the forged marksheet. On the basis of the said marksheeet co-accused Mamta Mittal got a job as Staff Nurse in 2013 and was rendering services since then. Investigation is still pending. As such, no indulgence is warranted at this stage. 6. It is submitted that the applicant acted as a middleman by transferring money to the co-accused for procuring the forged marksheet. On the basis of the said marksheeet co-accused Mamta Mittal got a job as Staff Nurse in 2013 and was rendering services since then. Investigation is still pending. As such, no indulgence is warranted at this stage. 6. However, it would not be desirable to enter into the merits of the rival contentions at this juncture. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case, in the opinion of this Court, no case for grant of bail is made out. 8. The application, therefore, stands rejected. 9. E- copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for compliance, if possible by the office of this Court. Certified copy/e-copy as per rules/directions.