THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.DURGA PRASAD CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1626 OF 2004 ORDER: This appeal at the instance of the State is directed against the acquittal of the accused in S.C.No.240 of 2001 by the I Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad on 02.09.2002. The respondents/accused were prosecuted for the oﬀence under Section 489-A, B, C, D alleging that on 27.04.2000 at about 12.30 hours P.C.No.2962 of Osmania University police station along with P.C.No.4484 went to Tarnaka Filling Station on a scooter for petrol, there they found one person with Hero Honda Motor Cycle has purchased petrol and oﬀered 500/- rupee note to the cashier and when the cashier on suspicion informed the said person that the 500/- rupee note appears to be fake, the said person left the Hero Honda motorcycle ran away from petrol bunk and that both the P.Cs chased on the scooter and failed to catch him and that they collected 500/- rupee fake note and Hero Honda motor cycle from the petrol bunk cashier and brought the same to the police station and handed over to the S.I of police with a written report dated.27.04.2000 at about 1.00 P.M. On receipt of the said report, the S.I of police has registered the case in Crime NO.85 of 2000 and seized Hero Honda motorcycle and two fake 500/- rupee notes (one oﬀered to the cashier of petrol bunk, the other found in the bag of Hero Honda Motor Cycle) under cover of a Panchanama in the presence of mediators. After making preliminary investigation he transferred the case ﬁle to C.I.D. and the Inspector of police, Automobile wing, CCs, Hyderabad took up investigation and obtained information from the RTA, Central Zone, Hyderabad about the owner of the motorcycle. On 11.05.2000 at about 3.00 P.M. on receipt of information, the investigating oﬃcer deputed H.C.4896 along with H.C.No.2189, P.C.5681 and 4680 to Panjagutta, who brought one person by name Alluri Nagamuni Reddy along with 22 fake 500/- rupee notes to the oﬃce of CCS, Hyderabad at 4.00 P.M. Then the investigating oﬃcer aﬀected the arrest of the said person and summoned Md.Saleem and Md.Omar and interrogated the said Nagamuni Reddy, who made a confession before the mediators. ON 12.05.2000 he was produced before XXI Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad and obtained police custody for one week. In pursuance of the confession, the investigating oﬃcer along with staﬀ and mediators proceeded to Cuddapah and on 15.05.2000 and arrested accused No.4 and 6 at Sandeep Lodge, Cuddapah at the instance of Nagamuni Reddy. On interrogation accused Nos.4 and 6 confessed before the mediators and the investigating Oﬃcer recovered 15 fake 500/- rupee notes from each accused under two separate panchanamas. In pursuance of the confessional statements of accused Nos. 4 and 6, the investigating oﬃcer along with staﬀ proceeded to Jaladanki of Nellore District and arrested accused No.2 at his residence and on interrogation, he made confession to the police and at this instance seized 360 fake 500/- rupee currency notes from accused No.2 under cover of Panchanama. In pursuance of confession of accused No.2, the investigating oﬃcer and mediators proceeded to Nellore and arrested accused Nos.1 and 3. On interrogation accused No.1 made a confession before mediators and at his instance 1,415 fake 500/- rupee notes and 188 fake 100/- rupee notes and the computer system along with other equipment were seized from the house of accused No.1. The investigation and evidence collected disclosed that accused No.1, who is a handicapped person involved in preparing fake currency notes at his residence with the help of his son accused No.3 and appointed accused No.2 as his main agent, who was released from jail very recently after completing conviction in a murder case, who sold fake currency notes to accused Nos.4, 5 and 6. Hence, accused Nos.1 and 3 are liable for punishment for the oﬀence under Sections 489-A, B, C, D, accused No.2 is liable for punishment for the oﬀence under Section 489-B and C IPC; accused NO.4 and 6 are liable for punishment for the oﬀence under Section 489-C IPC and accused No.5 is liable for punishment for the oﬀence under Section 489-A, B, C IPC. When the matter was taken up for trial by the Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, accused No.5 is reported dead. Hence, the case against accused No.5 is recorded as abated. The learned Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge has framed the charges under Section 489-A,B,C, D against accused Nos.1 and 3; charge under Section 489- B,C IPC against accused No.2, and under Section 489-C IPC against accused Nos.4 and 6, and they pleaded not guilty for the said charges. In order to establish the said charges, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 12 and got marked Exs.P.1 to P.14 and M.Os.1 to 25. No oral and documentary evidence was adduced on behalf of the accused. The learned Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge by taking into consideration of the said oral and documentary evidence found the accused not guilty for the said charges and acquitted them. Aggrieved by the said acquittal, the State has preferred the present appeal. Now, the point that arises for consideration is: Whether the prosecution could able to establish the charges under Sections under Section 489-A,B,C, D against accused Nos.1 and 3; charge under Section 489- B,C IPC against accused No.2, and under Section 489-C IPC against accused Nos.4 and 6, beyond reasonable doubt? P O I N T: According to the prosecution, accused No.1 with the help of his son accused No.3 preparing the fake currency notes at his residence and they appointed accused No.2 as their agent and releasing fake currency notes to him and who in turn sole the fake currency notes to accused No.4 and 6. The oﬀence was detected when the police constables of Osmania University gone to Tarnaka ﬁlling station on their scooter for petrol, they found one person purchased the petrol for his Hero Honda motorcycle and oﬀered Rs.500/- note and the cashier reported that the said note is fake currency notes, on which the said person left the motorcycle and ran away from the petrol bunk and the said two constables came to the police station and lodged complaint with regard to the same. P.W.1 is the police constable, Osmania university and who has found the cashier informing the person, who purchased the petrol, that the Rs.500/- oﬀered by him is fake currency note, upon which he ran away from the spot leaving the motorcycle. P.W.2 is the cashier and he has speciﬁcally stated about one person purchasing one liter petrol and oﬀered Rs.500/- and he suspected the said note and informed the same to the motorcyclist that it is a fake currency note, thereupon he ran away by leaving his motorcycle and 500/- rupee note. Thereafter, P.W.1 lodged a complaint with the police Osmania University and they seized the motorcycle and two fake currency notes i.e. one note from the cashier of the petrol bunk and another note from the bag of the motorcycle. Police have seized the said motorcycle and two fake currency notes in the presences of P.W.3. In order to establish the ownership of the motorcycle and it was taken away by accused No.5, the prosecution has examined P.W.4. Even though P.W.4 admitted that he purchased the Hero Honda Motorcycle in the year 1995, he sold away the same to his partner Satish Reddy even without registration and he has not supported the case of the prosecution that accused No.5 has taken away the motorcycle without informing him. According to the prosecution, accused No.5 was arrested at the ﬁrst instance and as per his confession, the other accused were arrested and seized the currency notes, computer and other material used for the preparation of the currency notes. According to the investigating oﬃcer, P.W.12 on receipt of credible information he deputed P.W.11 and another to Panjagutta to trace out Nagamuni Reddy (A.5), absconding accused and the deputed staﬀ returned to the police station along with Nagamuni Reddy and produced him with a report. Immediately, he summoned P.W5. and another, recorded confessional statement of Nagamuni Reddy (A.5). He also seized 22 fake currency notes of Rs.500/- denomination from Nagamuni Reddy (A.5) and he promised to show the places and persons from he got fake currency notes. On 12.05.2000 he produced the accused before XXI Metropolitan Magistrate Court and obtained police custody for 6 days. On the same day night he along with S.I Koteswara Rao and staﬀ, P.W.6 along with Nagamuni Reddy (A.5) proceeded to Cuddapah by engaging TATA Sumo Taxi and tried to trace out the remaining culprits. On 15.05.2000, he traced two persons by name Rana Pratap (A.6) and Mastanaiah (A.4) in front of Sundeep Lodge near RTC Bus stand, Cuddapah with the help of arrested accused. He interrogated Rana Pratap (A.6) and Mastanaiah (A.4) separately in the presence of P.W.6 and another and he recorded their confessional statements and recovered 15 fake 500 rupee currency notes from Rana Pratap and another 15 fake 500 rupee currency notes from Mastanaiah. On 16.05.2000, the accused led them to Jaladanki village of Nellore District and proceeded to the house of Jayaramaiah (A.2), where he arrested him and recorded his confessional statement before the mediators and seized 360 fake notes of 500 rupee denomination. On the same day at his instance, he arrested another accused Venkata Krishna Reddy (A.1) at his house situated at Kalyannagar, Nellore and seized 1415 fake notes of 500 denomination and 188 fake notes of 100 denomination, mixi, computer system, colour monitor and other equipment under the cover of Panchanama. In pursuance of the said confession, he arrested his son Pradeep kumar reddy (A.3) and returned back to Hyderabad along with arrested accused and seized material and produced them before the Court on 17.05.2000 and forwarded the seized material to F.S.L., through Court. He sent the seized fake currency notes to R.B.I for veriﬁcation on the same day. After receipt of fake currency notes and report, he has deposited them before Court. He visited Bangalore and examined the P.W.8 and recorded his statement, who sold the computer equipment to accused No.1. After completion of investigation, he laid the charge sheet against the accused. Therefore, according to the investigating oﬃcer, he has arrested the accused and seized the fake currency notes at the instance of accused in the presence of P.W.6. P.W.6 also supported the version of P.W.12 with regard to the arrest of the accused and recording of the confessional statements and seizure of the fake currency notes and other equipment from accused No.1. The seized currency notes are sent to R.B.I for veriﬁcation. P.W.7, who examined the same, has reported that the said notes are fake currency notes. P.W.9, who is the Assistant Director of F.S.L., to whom the seized currency notes were sent through Court has also submitted the report stating that the currency notes sent to him are fake currency notes. Accused Nos.1 and 3 are charged for the oﬀence under Section 489-A, B, C and D of IPC Section 489-A IPC deals with counterfeiting currency-notes or bank notes. Section 489-B IPC deals with using as genuine, forged or counterfeit currency-notes or bank-notes. Section 489-C IPC deals with possession of forged or counterfeit currency-notes or bank-notes. Section 489-D IPC dealing with making or possessing instruments or materials for forging or counterfeiting currency-notes or bank-notes. In the present case, according to the prosecution the investigating Oﬃcer has seized the computer, computer mouse, laser printing, multiple plug, iron box, glass plate, waster papers, Colour scanner, mixi, one empty bottle, bottle containing Diethyal Eithen, key board, iron scale, fevicol tin from the house of accused No.1. According to accused No.1, the said computer was sold by P.W.8. Even though P.W.8 stated that he sold one computer to accused No.1, he cannot identiﬁed the computer, which was seized from accused No.1 as the computer sold by him to accused No.1 Even if, it is established that P.W.8 identiﬁed computer sold by him, there is no material on record to show that the accused No.1 has used the said computer for preparation of counterfeit currency notes. Simply, seizing of the said material does not disclose that the accused counterfeiting currency notes by using the above seized articles. Therefore, the prosecution could not establish the oﬀence under Section 489- A and D IPC against accused Nos.1 and 3. The accused Nos.1, 2 and 3 was charged for the oﬀence under Section 489-B IPC, which deals with using as genuine, forged or counterfeit currency-notes or bank- notes. Except recovery of currency notes from accused Nos.1 and 2 there is no other evidence to prove the oﬀence under Section 489-B IPC. As such, accused Nos.1, 2 and 3 cannot be convicted for the oﬀence under Section 489-B IPC basing on the alleged confessional statement made before police officer as it is admission in evidence. The remaining charge framed against accused Nos.1 to 4 and 6 is under Section 489-C IPC, which deals with possession of forged or counterfeit currency-notes or bank-notes. In order to establish the same the prosecution has relied upon the evidence of P.W.6 and Investigating Oﬃcer P.W.12. Their evidence discloses about the recovery of fake currency notes from the accused at their instance as per their confessional statements under the cover of Panchanamas Exs.P.5, P.6, P.7 and P.8. The fake currency notes, which were seized from their possession, are M.Os.21 to 25 were found to be fake currency notes as per the evidence of P.W.7 and P.W.9. Therefore, it is established that the accused were in possession of fake currency notes. P.W.12 admitted in the cross-examination that there are corrections in the date in the panchanamas Ex.P.5, P.6, P.7 and P.8, but whereas P.W.6 has denied about the corrections in the said panchanamas. According to the investigating oﬃcer P.W.12, he has directed the Sub-Inspector to correct the said dates. In Ex.P.6 the date 14 is corrected as 15. In Ex.P.7 the date 15 is corrected as 16 at all places. The date portion is even corrected underneath the signature of the concerned Inspector of Police, but in Ex.P.6 while correcting 14.05.2000 into 15.05.2000 the week day portion which is kept in the bracket is not corrected. Therefore, it is evident that the dates in the mediators report were corrected to suit the case of the prosecution. According to the investigating oﬃcer, P.W.12 he took P.W.6 along with him for arrest of the accused in a private jeep. But P.W.6 could not able to say whether the said jeep belongs to the police or private agency. Moreover, the investigating oﬃcer, P.W.12 even though has arrested the accused at Cuddapah, Jaladanki and Nellore, has not informed the local police about the arrest of the accused. In view of the corrections made in the mediators report, the recovery of fake currency notes from the possession of the accused is doubtful as the corrections were not explained by the prosecution. Even if the recovery of fake currency notes from the possession of the accused was established, in order to convict the accused for the oﬀence under Section 489-C IPC, the prosecution has to establish that the accused knowing or having reason to believe the same to be forged or counterfeit and intending to use the same as genuine or that it may be used as genuine. Except the recovery of fake currency notes at the instance of the accused, there is no other material to show that they have got knowledge that the said notes are fake currency notes. Therefore, the lower Court has rightly observed that the prosecution could not establish the charges under Section 489-A, B, C, D against accused Nos.1 and 3; charge under Section 489-B, C IPC against accused No.2, and under Section 489-C IPC against accused Nos.4 and 6 and the said finding does not warrant any interference by this Court in the appeal. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. _______________________ P.DURGA PRASAD, J 9th December, 2011 Ksp