/Q;\ £ '^^W^ 1 t?-:... / ^ A£_^ "^^.^^- APPELLANT HIGH COURT OF CHHATTCS^ARH AT BILASPUR Criminal Abpeal No.763 of 2008 Deep Chand Jangde, S/o Shn' Sukalu Ram Jangde, Aged about 31 years, R/o Vjllage Dongargaon, Jai Stambh Chowk, P.5. Dongargaon, Distt.Rajnandgaon RESPONDENT APPELLANT RESPONDENT Versus The State of Chhattisgarh - through P.5. Lal Bagh, Distt.Rajnandgaon And Criminal Appeal No. 576 of 2009 Shivkumar Sahu, S/o Late Shri Dayaram Sahu, aged about 32 years, R/o Village Achholi, O.P.-Manjun, P.5.- bondilohara, District-Durg (C.&.) Versus State of Chhattisgarh Through : Police Station Lal Bagh. bistrict- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) (APPEALS UNDER SECTION 374(2) OF THE CObE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973) (SB: Hon'ble Mr. T.P. Sharma, J.) Present: Mr.H.S.Ahluwalia, counsel for the appetlant in Cr. A. No.763 of 2008. Mr.Shashank Thakur, counsel for the appellant in Cr.A.No.576 of 2009. Mr.Pradeep Singh, Panel lawyer for the State/respondent. JUb<&MENT (Delivered on 26th April, 2010) 1. Criminat Appeal No. 763 of 2008 filed by Deep Chand Jangde <& Criminal Appeal No.576 of 2009 filed by Shivkumar Sahu are arisin9 out of the judgment of conviction & order of sentence dated 6.8.2008 passed by the ./'^'y%. r^^ i y Sessions Judge, Rajnandgaon, in Sessions Case No.102/2007, therefore, they are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. Criminal Appeal Nos. 763 of 2008 <& 576 of 2009 are directed against the judgment of conviction & order of sentence dated 6.8.2008 passed by the Sessions Judge, Rajnandgaon, in Sessions Case No.102/2007, whereby <& whereunder learned Sessions Judge after holding appellant Deepchand Jangde guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 489A, 489B and 489C of the Indian Penat Code sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years <& to pay fine of Rs.2,000/-, rigorous imprisonment for five years <& to pay fine of Rs.2000/- and rigorous imprisonment for three years <& to pay fine of Rs.2000/-, in defautt of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months for each offence and appellant Shivkumar Sahu guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 489A, 489B, 489C and 4890 of the Indian Periql Code and sentenced him to uhdergo rigorous imprisonment forfive years & to pay fineof Rs.2000/-, n'gorous imprisonment for fiveyears&to pay fine of Rs.2000/-, rigorous impnsonment for three years A to pay fine of Rs.2000/- ond r^orous imprisonment for five years & to pay fine of Rs.2000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for two mohths for each offence, respectively alon9 with other accused Guleshwar Dewangan and Wanishwar Das Manikpuri. 3. Conviction is impugned on the ground that without any clinching and credible evidence, the Court below has convicted and sentenced the appellants as aforementioned. 4. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that Assistant Sub Inspector Pramod Rusiya (PW-6) posted at Crime Branch, Rajnandgaon received information from informant that accused (5uleshwar is in possession of counterfeit/ fake currency notes. He alon9 with police force proceeded fop village Ghorda, accused Guleshwar came to villa9e Ghorda, then he interrogated him, Guleshwar made disclosure statement of 100 fake currency notes of 1 ^:u.. ^^':. v%. ^ i^ ^ w? :<J^' / Rs.100/- denomination and also made inculpat^Sconfession relating to appellant beepchand, Shivkumar, Wanishwar vide Ex.P/1. Guleshwar produced 100 currency notes of Rs.100/- denomination, which were seized vide Ex.P/2. On the basis of information received, Pramod Rusiya (PW-6) interrogated appellant Deepchand at Dongargaon who made inculpatory disclosure statement of fake currency notes and possession of 400 fake currency notes of Rs.100/- denomination vide Ex.P/3. Appellant Deepchand produced the aforesaid fake currency notes which were seized vide Ex.P/4. Appellant Shivkumar was also taken into custody, he made disclosure statement of fake currency notes of Rs.1000/-, Rs.500/- and Rs.100/- and instrument for printing fake currency notes vide Ex.P/5. Appetlant Shivkumar also produced printer, scanner; scissor, copier machine, papers, 32 fake currency notes of Rs.1000/- denomination, 5 currency notes of Rs.500/- denomination, 10 currency notes of Rs.100/- denomination, 11 hatf printed (printed froni one side) fake currency notes of Rs.500/-, 35 half printed (printed from one side) fake currency notes of Rs.50/- and 3 half printed (printed from one side) fake currency notes of Rs.50/- which were seized vide Ex.P/6 from him. During the course of investigation, 4th accused Wanishwar Das was taken into custody. he also made disclosure statement of fake currency notes of Rs.100/-, Rs.500/- and Rs.1000/- vide Ex.P/7. Accused Wanishwar &as produced 47 fake currency notes of Rs.1000/- denomination, 12 fake currency notes of Rs.500/- denomination, 300 fake currency notes of Rs.100/- denomination and 15 currency notes of Rs.50/- denomination which were seized vide Ex.P/8. Dehati nalishi was recorded vide Ex.P/11 and on the basis of dehati nalishi, F.I.R. was registered vide Ex.P/12. Initjally fake currency notes were sent for primary examination to the Manager, State Bank of India, Branch Rajnandgaon who advised for examination of fake currency notes by the Reserved Bank of India vide Ex.P/10. Fake currency notes were sent for examination to the General Manager, Currency Note Press, Nasik Road vide Ex.P/13 with Schedule Ex.P/14. Vide examination report Exs.P/19 and P/20 of Currency Note Press, currency notes sent for examination were found 1 % fake and counterfeit. During the course of investigation, accused persons were arrested vide Exs.P/14 to P/17. Rojnamchas were recorded vide Exs.P/21 and P/22. F.I.R. was intimated to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajnandgaon vide Ex.P/23. 5. Statement of the witnesses were recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short 'Code') and after completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed before the Judiciat Magistrate First Class, Rajnandgaon, who in turn committed the case to the Court of Sessions, Rajnandgaon. 6. In order to prove the guilt of the accused/appellants, the prosecution has examined as many as 7 witnesses. Statements of the accused/appellants were recorded under Section 313 of the Code where they denied the circumstances appearing against them and ctaimed inhocence and false implication in the crime in question. 7. After affording opportunity of hearing to the parties, learned Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the accused/appellants as aforementioned. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the judgment impugned and recprd of the Court below. 9. Learned counsel for the appellants beep Chand Jangde and Shivkumar Sahu argued that this is the case of serious charge of possession and preparation of counterfeit/fake currency notes, that too in huge quantity and in case of serious charge, strict proof on behalf of the prosecution is required, but in the present case, the prosecution has utterly failed to prove the case against the appellants beyond all shadow of doubt. Latif (PW-1) has not supported the case of the prosecution relating to confessional statements ond recovery of alleged fake currency notes. The evidence of Virendra Thakur (PW-5) relating to confessional statements and recovery of foke currency notes does not inspire confidence and trustuvorthy. Learned counsel further submits that the conviction is substantially based on the —^•^Wjww^.^'-r^^-^-: ^^^^ /•^"^ w ^ ^ ^I^- evidence of Pramod Rusiya (PW-6). In the present case, conviction of the appellants is only on the basis of investigating officer who is virtually the complainant in this case could not be legal. Learned counsel contended that while imposing the sentence the Court below was not rational and has imposed serious sentence disproportionate to the offence alleged committed by the appellants. lO.Learned counsel placed retiance in the matter of Reman alias Raman and another v. State of Chhattisgarh and other connected matters in which this Court has found sentence of three years <& fine of Rs.2000/- appropriate for the offence punishable under Section 489C of the Indian Penal Code. 11.0n the other hdnd. learned State/respondent counsel supported the judgment impugned and argued that the prosecution has adduced sufficient evidence for convictibn of the appellants. Latif (PW-1) and Virendra Thakur (PW-5) have substantially corroborated the evidence of Pramod Rusjya (PW- 6) who has categorically supported the case of the prQSecution. Learned counsel further argued that the accused persons have committed the .^e^- , . , offence against the symbot of sovereignty and affects the' bone of the commercial transaction which ultimately affects the governance of the country. Huge quantity of currency notes were found in possession of the appellants along with instrument for preparation of such notes. 12.In order to appreciate the argument advanced on behalf of the parties, I have examined the material available on record. In the present case, conviction rests on the substantiat evidence of Assistant Sub Inspector Pramod Rusiya (PW-6) and the evidences of Latif (PW-1) and Virendra Thakur (PW-5). witnesses of disclosure statements and seizure of fake currency notes and articles. Pramod Rusiya (PW-6) has deposed in his evidence that he was posted as Assistant Sub Inspector in Crime Branch, Rajnandgaon. On 23.6.2007, he received information relating to possession 12008 L.T. (CG) 170 ^^"c-^M^t'a:2^^-;^ij_^ .€Ri^ ^ "^ ^ / . of fake currency notes, he proceeded for village Ghorda where accused Guleshwar met, he took him into custody and interrogated, he made disclosure statement of fake currency notes of Rs.100/- denomination which he recorded vide Ex.P/1 and also recorded dehati nalishi vide Ex.P/11. Guleshwar produced 100 fake currency notes of Rs.100/- denomination which were seized vide Ex.P/2. Guleshwar also made disclosure statement of fake currency notes in possession of appellant Deepchand, he went to appellant Deepchand and interrogated him, he also made disclosure statement of fake currency notes of Rs.40,000/- vide Ex.P/3, appellant Deepchand produced such fake currency notes which he seized vide Ex.P/4. While making disclosurestatement appellant Deepchand also disclosed the fact that other accused Waneshwar was having fake currency notes, then he went to Waneshwar and interrogated him, accused Waneshwar also made disclosure statement of fake currency notes, half printed fake currency notes, scanner, printer and other instrument vide Ex.P/7. Waneshwar produced 47 fake currency notes of Rs.1000/- denomination, 12 fake currency notes of Rs.500/- denomination, 300 fake currency notes of Rs.100/- denomination and 15 fake currency notes of Rs.50/- denomination which he seized vide Ex.P/8. He also interrogated appellant Shivkumar who made cjisclosure statement of fake currency notes, scanner, printer and scissor. Appellant Shivkumar produced printer, scanner, copier machine, papers, scissor, 32 fake currency notes of Rs.1000/- denomination, 5 fake currency notes of Rs.500/- denomination, 10 fake currency notes of Rs.100/- denomination, 11 hatf printed (one side printed) of Rs.500/-, 35 half printed (one side printed) of Rs.50/- vide Ex.P/6. He arrested accused persons vide Exs.P/14 to P/17. Fake currency notes were sent for examination to the Oeneral Manager, Currency Note Press, Nasik Road vide Ex.P/19 and report is Ex.P/20. He has ident.ified currency notes seized from the accused persons and other articles. He has also proved initial Rojnamchas vide Exs.P/21 and P/22. Latif (PW-1) has admitted signature over Exs.P/1 to P/8. He has deposed that police informed that they are making seizure of fake currency notes. He has also deposed that some notes ..•11 ^^^ ^ ^ r were half pn'nted but he has not substantially corroborated the case of the prosecution and the prosecution declared him hostile. He has admitted in para 7 of his cross-examination that he has signed the papers after understanding the fact, but he has supported the case of the prosecution. The prosecution has examined another witness Virendra Thakur (PW-5) who has deposed in his evidence that accused Guleshwar has made disclosure statement of fake currency notes and the police has seized fake currency notes in huge quantity from appellant beepchand and one peon of the school vide Exs.P/1 to P/8. In his detail cross-examination he has substantially corroborated the case of the prosecution. Brujendra Nath bhali (PW-2) has deposed in his evidence that fake currency notes were sent for examination to him. He found that note appears to be fake, then he advised for examination by Currency Note Press vide Ex.P/10. Chunnilal Dekate (PW-3) has deposed in his evidence that he has transmitted fake cyrrency notes for examination vide Ex.P/13. befence has cross-examined substantial witness Pramod Rusiya (PW-6) in detail. In his detail cross- examination, he has specifically stated that all the accused persons have made disclosure statements of fake currency notes and instruments for preparation of fake currency notes which he recorded and has seized fake currency notes and other instruments at the instance of different accused persons. He has denied the suggestion that he has made false case against the accused persons. 13.In the present case, the aforesaid currency notes were not genuine and fake^is not disputed on behalf of the appellants but they have disputed only conscious possession of fake currency notes. 14. The evidence of Pramod Rusiya (PW-6) has been substantially corroborated by the evidence of Virendra Thakur (PW-5). Promad Rusiya is a police officer. but his evidence cannot be discarded only on the ground that he i,s police officer and interested in the outcome of the case. While dealing with the question of evidentiary value and reiiabt'lity of the statement of potice officer, the Apex Court in the matter of Anil alias Andya Sadashiv e? _.f Nandoskar v. State of Maharashtra2 it has been held by the Apex Court that witnesses being police officers does not by itself create a doubt about their creditworthiness if non examination of Panch witnesses is explained satisfactorily. Relevant portion reads as under: "Indeedall the five prosecution witnesses who have been examined in support of search and seizure were members of the raiding party. Theyare all police officials. There is, however, no rule oflaw that the evidence of police officials has to be discarded or that it suffers from some inherent infirmity. Prudence, however, requires that the evidence of the police officials, who are interested in the outcome of the result of the case, needs to be carefully scrutinized and mdependently appreciated The police officials do not suffer from any disability to give evidence and the mere fact that they are police officials does not by itself give rise to any doubt about thefr creditworthiness. We have carefully and critically analysed the evidence of all the5 police officials. There is nothing on the record to show that any one of them was hostile to the appellant and despite lengthy cross"examinatjon their evidence has remained unshaken throughout These witnesses have deposed in clear terms the details of the trap that wa^ laid to apprehend the appellant and the manner in which he was apprehended. Their evidence regarding search and seizure of the weapons from the appellant is stra/ghtforward, consistent and specific. It inspfres confidence and learned counsel for the appellant has not been able to point out any serjous, let alone fatal, infirmity in their evidence. In our opinion, the factum ofsearch and seizure of the country made revolver from the consdous possession of the appellant has been established by the prosecution beyond any reasonable doubt. The explanation given by the prosecution, for the non-examination of the two Panch witnesses, which is supported by the report Ex. 24 filed by PW-4 P.I. Gaikwad is satisfactory. The evidence on the record shows that the raiding party made sincere efforts to Join with them two independent Panchas at the time of search and seizure and they were so Joined They are also cited as prosecution witnesses and summoned tagive evfdence. However, desp/te diligent efforts made by the prosecuting agency to serve them, they could not be located or traced and therefore, they could not be examined at the tr/al. In the face of the facts stated in report Ex. 24, the correctness of which has remained virtually unchallenged during the cross examination of PW'4, the non examination of the two Panchas cannot be said to be on account of any oblique reason. The/r non production at the trfal thus has not created any dent in the prosecution case. The prosecution cannot be accused of / AIR1996 SCW 2943 I. ^ (b withholding these witnesses since it made every effort to trace and produce them at the trial but failed on account of the fact that they had left the address furnished by them at the time of search and their whereabouts could not be traced despite diligent effort made in that behalf. We, therefore, do not find any reason to doubt the correctness of the prosecution version relating to the apprehension of the appellant, the search and seizure by the raiding party and the recovery from the appellant of the country made revolver and cartridges forwhich he could produce no license or authority because of the non examination of the Panch witnesses we find that the evidence of PW 1 to PW-5 is reliable, cogent and trustworthy." In the matter of P.P. Beeran v. State of Kerala3 it has been held by the Apex Court that the reliance can be placed on the uncorroborated evidence of the Sub Inspector of Police. 15.In the light of law propounded in the aforesaid case, I have closely scrutinized the evidence of Pramod Rusiya (PW-6) corroborated by the evidence of Virendra Thakur (PW-6) which clearly establishes that appellant Deepchand has made disclosure statement of possession of counterfeit/fake currency notes of Rs.40,000/- in his possession and 400 fake currency notes of Rs.100/- denomination were seized from appellant Deepchand. Appellant Shivkumar has also made disclosure statement of fake currency notes and instrument for preparation of fake currency notes vide Ex.P/5. 32 fake currency notes of Rs.1000/- denomination, 5 fake currency notes of Rs.500/- denomination and 10 fake currency notes of Rs.100/- denomination, 11 half printed currency notes of Rs.500/-, 35 half printed currency notes of Rs.50/- along with printing instrument and cutting instrument were seized from appellant Shivkumar vide Ex.P/6. 16. befence has cross-examined this witness in detail but has not been able to elicit anything in his cross-examination to show that he is having enmity with the appellants or any departure from the procedure prescribed. His evidence inspires confidence, trustworthy and safe to rely. The evidence of Pramod Rusiya (PW-6) corroborated by the evidence of Virendra Thakur (PW-5) and examination report of seized fake currency notes Exs.P/19 and ^ 3 AIR 2001SC 2420 1?^. 1 10 P/20 are sufficient to establish the fact that on the basis of disclosure statement of appellant Deepchand vide Ex.P/3, 400 fake currency notes of Rs.100/- denomination were seized. Likewise on the basis of disclosure statement of appellant Shivkumar vide Ex.P/5, 47 fake currency notes of Rs.1000/-, Rs.500/- and Rs.100/- denomination, 11 half printed currency notes of Rs.500/-, 35 half printed currency notes of Rs.500/- along with printed material have been seized from oppellant Shivkumar vide Ex.P/6. 17. While dealing with the provisions of section 27 of the Evidence Aet, the Apex Court in the matter of Mohmed Inayatullah v. The State of Maharashtra4 has held that the prosecution is required to satisfy three conditions (a) discovery of fact albeit relevant facts in consequence of the information received from the person accused of an offence (b) discovery of such fact must be deposed to and (iii) at the time of receipt of the information accused must be in police custody. The last but most important condition is that only "so much of the information" as relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered isadmissible. 18.In the present case, appellants Deepchand and Shivkumar have made disclosure statements that they were in possession of fake currency notes and the same has been discovered at their instances. In this case, not only the fact discover of currency notes is admissible in evidence, but the fact that fake currency notes have been discovered at the instances of the appellants are admissible in evidence in terms of Section 27 of the Evidence Act. At the instance of appellant Shivkumar, printer, scanner, copier machine, papers, scissor, 11 half printed currency notes of Rs.500/- and 35 half printed currency notes of Rs.500/- along with printed material have been seized from him vide Ex.P/6. Appellant Shivkumar has not offered any explanation that as to how half pn'nted currency notes in huge quantity were found in possession and as to how he was in possession of printing operates of currency notes and also in possession of half pn'nted fake currency notes which were not genuine. 4(1976) 1 SCC 828 ill::T r : "tf- 11 19.These evidences are sufficient to establish the fact that the appellants were in possession of fake currency notes knowing the fact that they are not genuine and are fake. Appellant Shivkumar was in possession of printing operates and half printed currency notes shows that printing of fake currency notes was in process. 20.Mere possession of currency notes with the knowledge that they are counterfeit or fake currency notes is not sufficient to convict the accused/appellants under section 489C of the IPC. Prosecution is required to prove that the appellants were possessing the counterfeit currency notes with the intent to use the same as genuine or it may be used as genuine. As held in the case of Umashankar v. State of Chhattisgarh the prosecution is required to prove mens rea on the part of the accused/appellants and in the absence of any specific question with regard to possession of fake currency notes, the accused are entitled for acquittal. 21.In he present case, specific question relating to possession of fake and counterfeit currency notes was put to the accused/appellants which they have denied. In this case the currency notes were not in casual possession of the accused/appellant which they had obtained in routine manner from any other person during the course of commercial transaction but were within their knowledge that they were counterfeit or fake currency notes. They have not stated anything that they were possessing the said currency notes for any other specific purpose, These are the special facts within the knowtedge of the appellants. They are required to exptain in terms of section 106 of the Evidence Act that why they were possessing those counterfeit currency notes. In the absence of any such explanation the possession of counterfeit currency notes within their knowledge, it may safely be inferred that they were possessing the counterfeit currency notes knowing them to be so with the intention of using the same as genuine. Thus the facts of the case in the matter of Umashankar V. State of Chhattisgarh (supra)5 are distinguishable on facts. 5AIR 2001 SC 3074 i^a^s.a.ias^w.tix.zais^.WiiSis^ZSlSiit^-sa^^ 12 ^&y T 22. The appellant Shivkumar has been convicted & sentenced under Sections 489A, 489B, 489C and 489D of the Indian Penal Code. The evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution is sufficient for conviction of appellant Shivkumar under Sections 489A, 489B, 489C and 489D of the Indian Penal Code. Appellant Shivkumar was in possession of printing operates, he has forged counterfeit/fake currency notes, he was in possession of currency notes with intent to use the same as genuine and he has processed currency notes for printing. Likewise appellant Deepchand has been convicted under Sections 489A, 489B and 489C of the Indian Penal Code. The evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution is not sufficient to establish the fact that appellant beepchand has played any part in counterfeiting or processing of counterfeiting fake currency notes but is sufficient to establish the fact that he was in possession of fake currency notes in huge quantity and has received the same from other personsand he was possessing the same with intent to use the same as genuine, therefore, conviction <& sentence of appellant beepchand under Section 489A is not sustainable under the law but conviction of appellant beepchand under Section 489B and 489C of the Indian Penal Code are sustainable under the law. 23.Learned counsel for the appellants placed reliance in the matter of Reman alias Raman (supra)'in which this Court has held that considering the circumstances of the case sentence of rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs.2000/- under Section 489C of the Indian Penal Code is appropriate sentence in the circumstances of the case. 24.This is the case of fake currency notes in huge quantity. The offence committed by the accused/appellants is the offence against the symbol of sovereignty and affects the bone of the commercial transaction which ultimately affects