1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.67/2009 Nitu R.Gupta Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra Respondent Aasna Shaikh for the petitioner Mr.P.A.Pol,APP for the State CORAM: Mrs.Mridula Bhatkar,J. DATE : 20th July,2009. P.C. . Heard. 2] This revision application has been preferred by the accused against the order passed by the learned Asstt.Sessions Judge,on 19/1/2009 in the discharge application filed under section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner/accused is prosecuted for the offences punishable under sections 489-B,489-C read with section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. It is contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that there is no evidence against the petitioner showing any implication in the offence of fake currency. The evidence which is available against the petitioner/accused is restricted only to the statement of co-accused stating about the involvement of the petitioner in the said offence. 3] The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a housewife .No fake currency was found with her except 2 true currency of Rs.24,000/- and some telephone calls between the petitioner and the co-accused. It is submitted that this is insufficient evidence to frame the charge and the order of the learned Sessions Judge be set aside. 4] The learned Special P.P.has opposed the revision application and pointed out the relevant portion from the record showing the involvement of the petitioner. 5] The petitioner is charged for the offence involving conspiracy alongwith offences punishable u/s 489 B and 489-C . The genuine currency of Rs.24,000/- which was recovered from her is alleged to be procured from the accused. The telephone calls between the petitioner and co-accused create grave suspicion about the petitioner and sufficient ground to frame charge against the accused.The learned Sessions Judge has rightly rejected the discharge application . Hence no interference is required in the impugned order. The petition stands dismissed. (Mrs.Mridula Bhatkar,J.)