[-1-] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.378 OF 2007 Patric Indica Grigori ] @ George Okore ] An adult, Nigerian National ] Aged about 27 years, ] residing at Lagos, ] Nigeria, Occ: Business ] at present in judicial ] custody at Kolhapur Central ] Prison. ]..Appellant Vs. The State of Maharashtra ] At the instance of Cuffe ] Parade Police Station in ] their CR No. 18 of 2005 ]..Respondent ... Mr.Taraq Sayed Advocate for Appellant Mr.Rajesh More A.P.P. for the State ... CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM: SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATE : APRIL 17, 2008 DATE : APRIL 17, 2008 DATE : APRIL 17, 2008 ORAL JUDGMENT: ORAL JUDGMENT: ORAL JUDGMENT: 1. Heard the learned advocate for the appellant and the learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The appellant-original accused has challenged the judgment and order dated 21.2.2007 passed by the learned 13th adhoc Addl. Sessions Judge, Sewree, Mumbai in Sessions Case No.482 of 2005. By [-2-] the said judgment and order, the learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellant under Sections 389(B) of IPC and under Section 420 of IPC. For the offence under Section 489(B) of IPC, the appellant was sentenced to RI for five years and fine of Rs.1000/- i/d S.I. for one month. For the offence under Section 420 of IPC, the appellant was sentenced to RI for three years and fine of Rs.1000/- i/d SI for one month. The learned Sessions Judge directed that both the substantive sentences shall run concurrently. 3. The prosecution case briefly stated is that the appellant went to shop of the complainant P.W.1 Shazia Shaha and purchased ladies garments worth Rs.5600/-. Appellant handed over two notes of 50 Euro currency as the purchase price of the above mentioned garments. Rs.5600/- was paid. Rs.200/- was returned to the appellant. Thereafter, again the appellant came to the shop of the complainant. In the meantime, the complainant had already became aware that two Euro notes were counterfeit, hence, when the appellant came to the shop of complainant second time, he came to be apprehended and CR came to be lodged against the appellant. [-3-] 4. The learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that he is not arguing the matter for acquittal and he will restrict his arguments only to the quantum of sentence imposed under Section 489(B) of IPC. He has submitted that the sentence of imprisonment under Section 489(B) be reduced. It is submitted that the appellant is a young man and when the appellant himself received the notes, he was not aware that they were counterfeit currency notes. Mr.Sayed, the learned advocate for the appellant submitted that if the appellant knew that the notes were counterfeit and he had given them to the complainant, on the second occasion, the appellant would not have taken the risk of going to the shop of the complainant. He submitted that this itself shows that the appellant had no knowledge that the notes were counterfeit. However, he has submitted that he is not arguing the case for acquittal and he is restricting his arguments only to the quantum of sentence imposed under Section 489(B) of IPC. Mr.Sayed submitted that sentence of imprisonment of five years under Section 489(B) of IPC, be reduced to three years. The learned APP has no objection to the said [-4-] sentence of imprisonment being reduced, however he submitted that, fine amount may be increased. It is informed that the appellant is in jail since 3 years and 3 months. 5. In view of the above, the following order is passed. . The conviction of the appellant under Section 489(B) and 420 of IPC is maintained. Sentence imposed under Section 420 of IPC is also maintained. However, the sentence of imprisonment imposed under Section 489(B) of IPC is reduced from five years to three years and 3 months R.I. However, the fine amount imposed under Section 489(B) of IPC is increased from Rs.1,000/- to Rs.5000/- and i/d of payment of Rs.5,000/-, R.I. for 3 months. Both the sentences of imprisonment shall run concurrently. On completion of the period of three years three months of imprisonment and on deposit of total fine of Rs.5,000/-, the appellant shall be released if not required in any other case. 6. Appeal is partly allowed in the above terms. [-5-] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]