IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4582 OF 2006 The State of Maharashtra .. Applicant Versus Santosh Kisan Nikam .. Respondent Mr.Y.S.Shinde, A.P.P for the applicant. Mr.K.B.Sonwalkar for the respondent. CORAM CORAM CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. : A.S.OKA, J. : A.S.OKA, J. DATE DATE DATE : 10th February 2009. : 10th February 2009. : 10th February 2009. P.C.: . Heard learned A.P.P for the applicant in support of this application for leave to prefer an appeal. The respondent accused has been acquitted for the offences punishable under section 489-B and 489-C of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 10th January 2005 at about 2.30 p.m, the Assistant Manager, Cash of State Bank of India, Vaduj branch came to the Chief Manager of the said bank and told him that there were five currency notes of Rs.100/- each which were suspected to be false were received by the cashier Mr.Bharat Salunkhe alongwith six challans duly passed by the concerned Government Department. The cashier had (2) accepted the challans and returned the original challans after crediting the amount. From the paper and printing of the said currency notes the cashier had suspicion about the genuineness of the currency notes. 3. From the cashier the Chief Manager learned that Touring Talkies owners have credited the amount of entertainment tax of Rs.5,000/- each under six separate challans totally amounting to Rs.30,000/-. The Chief Manager lodged the F.I.R. 4. I have perused the notes of evidence and the impugned judgment. P.W.1 Subhash Choudhari is the first informant (Chief Manager of the State Bank of India). In the cross examination he admitted that a layman may not be able to detect that the currency notes were fake unless the layman had requisite experience. He further admitted that there were no signatures of the accused on the copies of the challans kept with the bank. 5. P.W.2 Ramesh is another officer of the said bank. He also stated in the cross examination that it is not possible to decide merely on visual inspection of the currency notes whether the same are genuine or fake. P.W.3 Bharat Salunkhe stated that he was working as a (3) cashier. The accused came to him alongwith six challans and deposited the entertainment tax. He deposited a sum of Rs.30,000/- in cash. While counting the currency notes of Rs.100/- he suspected about the genuineness of five currency notes of Rs.100/-. In the cross examination he was shown the copies of the six challans kept in the custody of the bank. He admitted that there is no mention of denomination of the notes deposited alongwith the respective challans. He pleaded ignorance about the fact whether the challans bear the signature of the accused. He stated that he was unable to tell against which challan the said five currency notes of Rs.100/- were taken. He stated that the number of the notes is not mentioned on the challans and he personally did not note this fact on any of those challans. He stated that a pay-in-slip regarding deposit of amount has not been obtained by the bank. 6. P.W.4 Sharad Kadam is the Entertainment Tax Inspector who had passed the said six challans. He stated that cash was collected by Talathi in his presence. He stated that cash was handed over by the Talathi to respondent for depositing it with the bank. In the cross examination he admitted that he did not tell the police that cash was handed over by the Talathi (4) to respondent accused in his presence. P.W.6 Ajay Raut is the said Talathi. He stated that he accompanied P.W.4 Mr.Sharad Kadam while the said witness collected the amount of entertainment tax from the owners of the touring talkies. He stated that P.W.4 Mr.Kadam instructed him to prepare bundles of notes of separate denominations. He stated that P.W.4 Mr.Kadam requested him to provide one person for depositing amount with the State Bank of India and accordingly he instructed the accused to do the job. He stated that the accused was working as his assistant in private work. 7. P.W.5 Vikramsingh Ghadge in his cross examination stated that it was the duty of the P.W.4 Mr.Kadam to carry the amount and to deposit the same with the bank. The said witness was shown the five currency notes which were allegedly counterfeit notes. He stated that the said currency notes may be the currency notes collected by P.W.4 Mr.Kadam from Touring Talkies owners. 8. Thus, the evidence of the prosecution witnesses discloses that the amount was collected by P.W.4 Mr.Kadam in company of P.W.6 Ajay Raut. On instructions of P.W.4 Mr.Kadam, P.W.6 Mr.Raut instructed the (5) respondent accused to deposit the amount with the State Bank of India. When the disputed notes were shown to P.W.6 Mr.Raut, he stated that the said notes may be currency notes collected by P.W.4 Mr.Kadam. There are admissions of the officers of the State Bank of India that in absence of experience, on visual inspection, it is not possible to notice that the notes were not genuine. The conclusion recorded by the learned Judge that guilt of the respondent is not established is certainly a possible and logical conclusion which could have been drawn on the basis of evidence on record. No case is made out for grant of leave. Application is rejected. (A.S.Oka,J)