ORDER : VENKATESH NAIK T, J. Heard Sri.Ankit Desai, Sri.Sabeel Ahmed and Sri.Mohamed Abrar S., learned counsel for the petitioners and Smt.Kirtilata Patil, learned HCGP for respondent- State. 2. Crl.P.No.102330/2025 is filed by petitioner- accused No.5, Crl.P.102337/2025 is filed by the accused Nos.6 and 7 and Crl.P.No.102214/2025 is filed by the petitioner-accused No.3 under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., [483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ] to grant bail in Crime No.94/2025 of Gangavati Town Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 179 and 180 of BNS-2023. 3. Brief facts of the prosecution case is as under; One Gangadhar Vereshappa lodged first information report (FIR) to the respondent-Police alleging that on 02.05.2025 at about 7 p.m. when he was at the cash counter of the bar and restaurant, accused Nos.1 and 2 came to the bar and took full bottle of Royal Stage whisky worth Rs.1,205-00. They tendered 3 notes of Rs.500 denomination totaling Rs.1,500/- and requested for change. On suspicion of the said notes, the complainant examined them with a currency verification machine and discovered that they were fake currency notes. Therefore, he informed the said aspect to the Manager and Assistant Manager and when they enquired with accused Nos.1 and 2 about fake notes they ran away from the spot. However, they were caught by other persons and produced before the police. Based on the complaint, Gangavathi police registered the case in Crime No.94/2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 179 and 180 of BNS-2023, this lead to the registration of FIR and investigation. During the course of investigation, accused Nos.1 and 2 were arrested and the investigation officer recorded their voluntary statements. Pursuant to their voluntary statements, the name of accused Nos.3, 5, 6 and 7 were disclosed. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the case. The alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. They are ready to abide by any conditions imposed by this Court. Hence, they pray to allow the petitions. 5. Per contra, learned HCGP contended that there is a prima facie allegation against the petitioners. The investigation is still in progress. If the petitioners are released on bail, they may tamper with prosecution witnesses and hamper the investigation and thus, prays for rejection of bail petitions. 6. Perused the material available on record. 7. 5. Per contra, learned HCGP contended that there is a prima facie allegation against the petitioners. The investigation is still in progress. If the petitioners are released on bail, they may tamper with prosecution witnesses and hamper the investigation and thus, prays for rejection of bail petitions. 6. Perused the material available on record. 7. On perusal of the material available on record, the record reveals that accused Nos.1 and 2 had been to the bar and restaurant of first informant, and after purchasing alcohol bottles, accused Nos.1 and 2 tendered three currency notes of Rs.500-00, which appears to be fake. On enquiry, accused Nos.1 and 2 did not answer properly and they tried to escape from the spot. However, they were secured by the general public and produced before the Police. 8. From the material available on record, it reveals that the petitioners are not habitual offenders, and the learned HCGP did not dispute the said aspect. 9. In the instant case, the investigating officer has seized fake currency notes total for a sum of Rs.1,00,000- 00 along with original currency notes from the possession of all the accused persons. However, investigation officer has not followed the monitory provisions under Section 181 of BNSS -2023 which reads as under: “181. 9. In the instant case, the investigating officer has seized fake currency notes total for a sum of Rs.1,00,000- 00 along with original currency notes from the possession of all the accused persons. However, investigation officer has not followed the monitory provisions under Section 181 of BNSS -2023 which reads as under: “181. Statements to police and use thereof.- (1) No statement made by any person to a police officer in the course of an investigation under this Chapter, shall, if reduced to writing, be signed by the person making it; nor shall any such statement or any record thereof, whether in a police diary or otherwise, or any part of such statement or record, be used for any purpose, save as hereinafter provided, at any inquiry or trial in respect of any offence under investigation at the time when such statement was made: Provided that when any witness is called for the prosecution in such inquiry or trial whose statement has been reduced into writing as aforesaid, any part of his statement, if duly proved, may be used by the accused, and with the permission of the Court, by the prosecution, to contradict such witness in the manner provided by section 148 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023; and when any part of such statement is so used, any part thereof may also be used in the re- examination of such witness, but for the purpose only of explaining any matter referred to in his cross-examination. (2) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to apply to any statement falling within the provisions of clause (a) of section 26 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023; or to affect the provisions of the proviso to sub-section (2) of section 23 of that Adhiniyam. Explanation.-An omission to state a fact or circumstance in the statement referred to in sub- section (1) may amount to contradiction if the same appears to be significant and otherwise relevant having regard to the context in which such omission occurs and whether any omission amounts to a contradiction in the particular context shall be a question of fact.” 10. Further, investigating officer has also not followed the provisions under Section 185 of BNSS -2023, which reads as under: “185. Search by police officer. Further, investigating officer has also not followed the provisions under Section 185 of BNSS -2023, which reads as under: “185. Search by police officer. (1) Whenever an officer in charge of a police station or a police officer making an investigation has reasonable grounds for believing that anything necessary for the purposes of an investigation into any offence which he is authorised to investigate may be found in any place within the limits of the police station of which he is in charge, or to which he is attached, and that such thing cannot in his opinion be otherwise obtained without undue delay, such officer may, after recording in writing the grounds of his belief in the case-diary and specifying in such writing, so far as possible, the thing for which search is to be made, search, or cause search to be made, for such thing in any place within the limits of such station. (2) police officer proceeding under sub-section (1), shall, if practicable, conduct the search in person: Provided that the search conducted under this section shall be recorded through audio-video electronic means preferably by mobile phone. (3) If he is unable to conduct the search in person, and there is no other person competent to make the search present at the time, he may, after recording in writing his reasons for so doing, require any officer subordinate to him to make the search, and he shall deliver to such subordinate officer an order in writing, specifying the place to be searched, and so far as possible, the thing for which search is to be made; and such subordinate officer may thereupon search for such thing in such place. (4) The provisions of this Sanhita as to search- warrants and the general provisions as to searches contained in section 103 shall, so far as may be, apply to a search made under this section. (5) Copies of any record made under sub- section (1) or sub-section (3) shall forthwith, but not later than forty-eight hours, be sent to the nearest Magistrate empowered to take cognizance of the offence, and the owner or occupier of the place searched shall, on application, be furnished, free of cost, with a copy of the same by the Magistrate.” 11. Thus, it shows that the investigating officer has not followed the mandatory provisions of Sections 181 and 185 of BNSS -2023 and nowhere, the investigation officer has stated that accused Nos.1 and 2 were in wrongful possession of fake currency notes. In fact, the investigation officer must establish that accused Nos.1 and 2 were in possession and use of fake notes. Admittedly, the alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. 12. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, looking into the nature of allegation made against the petitioners, gravity of offence, severity of punishment, chances of petitioner absconding or fleeing away from the justice if released on bail, character and antecedents of the petitioner tampering of the prosecution witnesses, more particularly, the petitioners are not habitual offenders and hence they are entitled for grant of bail by imposing certain conditions. Accordingly, the Court proceeds to pass the following; ORDER The Crl.P.No.102214/2025, Crl.P.No.102337/2025 and Crl.P.No.102330/2025 filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., are allowed. The petitioners-accused Nos.3, 5, 6 and 7 are ordered to be enlarged on bail in Crime No.94/2025 of Gangavathi Town Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 179 and 180 of the BNS-2023, on they executing personal bond in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of jurisdictional Court, subject to the following conditions: i) The petitioners shall not tamper the prosecution witnesses and shall not threaten the witnesses; ii) The petitioners shall appear before the Court regularly without fail; iii) The petitioners shall not involve themselves in similar offences. iv) The petitioners shall mark their attendance on 1 st and 16 th day of every month in between 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. for a period of six months or till filing of the final report, whichever is earlier. Violation of any one of the conditions would entitle the prosecution to seek for cancellation of the bail.