Delhi District Court
State vs Asgar Ahmad Etc on 28 November, 2011
FIR No. 191/07
State Vs Asgar Ahmad etc
28.11.2011
Pre: Ld. APP for the state.
Accused persons namely 1)Meena Begum and 2)Asgar Ahmad are in JC.
They have no counsel.
The order on sentence was adjourned many times at the request of proxy
counsel for accused persons since main counsel was not available for them vide
court orders dated 15.11.2011, 19.11.2011 and lastly on 25.11.2011. Today,
again accused persons sought adjournment since they have no main counsel.
Therefore, in view of the previous order sheets request of accused persons for
adjournment is turned down.
Arguments of ld. APP on sentence heard at length. Convict persons have
also been heard. Convict persons namely 1)Asgar Ahmad and 2)Meena
Begum are sentenced to undergo Rigorous imprisonment for 3 years for the
offence u/s 489C r/w 34 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/ each in default 6
months further R.I. Benefit of section 428 Cr. PC be given. Copy of this order
and judgment be given to the convict at free of cost forthwith. Orders accordingly.
(RAJ KAPOOR)
ASJ2/ West
Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi
28.11.2011
1
IN THE COURT OF SH. RAJ KAPOOR, LD. ADDITIONAL SESSIONS
JUDGE - 2 : WEST/ TIS HAZARI COURTS: DELHI.
FIR No. 191/07
State Vs Asgar Ahmad etc
Police Station Special Cell
Under Section 489B, 489C/ 34 IPC
Convicted u/s 489C read with 34 IPC
ORDER ON THE POINT OF SENTENCE
28.11.2011
Pre: Ld. APP for the state.
Accused persons namely 1)Meena Begum and 2)Asgar Ahmad were
convicted for the offence u/s 489C read with 34 IPC but acquitted u/s
489B IPC. Other coaccused persons namely Wakil Ahmad Mustakin
were acquitted vide Judgment dated 08.11.2011.
The order on sentence was adjourned many times at the request of
proxy counsel for accused persons since main counsel was not available
for them vide court orders dated 15.11.2011, 19.11.2011 and lastly on
25.11.2011. Today, again accused persons sought adjournment since
they have no main counsel. Therefore, in view of the previous order
sheets request of accused persons for adjournment is turned down.
2
Arguments of ld. APP on sentence heard at length. Ld. APP submits
that such type offences are increasing day by day and dangerous for our
country economy. He again argues and submits that accused persons
have already been acquitted for the offence u/s 489 B IPC. They have only
been convicted for the offence punishable u/s 489 C/ 34 IPC. On these
grounds ld. APP submits that convict persons deserve maximum
punishment.
Contrary to it, accused /convict Meena Begum submits that she is a
very poor lady. Her age is about 55 years old. She has no previous
criminal antecedents. She further submits that she has been falsely
implicated in this case. On these grounds she seeks pardon and prays for
release.
Accused /convict Asgar Ahmad submits that he is also a very poor
person. He has no previous criminal antecedents. He further submits that
he has been falsely implicated in this case. He has six children to look
after. He is aged about 65 years old and suffering from heart ailment.
On these grounds he seeks pardon and prays for release.
I have heard the submissions of convict persons and ld. APP as well.
3
Keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and quantum of
the amount involved in this case, to my view ends of justice will be met if
convict persons are sentenced to undergo Rigorous imprisonment for 3
years for the offence u/s 489C r/w 34 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/
each in default 6 months further R.I.
Accordingly, convict persons namely 1)Asgar
Ahmad and 2)Meena Begum are sentenced to
undergo Rigorous imprisonment for 3 years for
the offence u/s 489C r/w 34 IPC and to pay a fine
of Rs.5000/ each in default 6 months further R.I.
Benefit of section 428 Cr. PC be given.
Copy of this order and judgment be given to the
convict at free of cost forthwith. Orders
accordingly.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT
ON THIS 28.11.2011
(RAJ KAPOOR)
ASJ2/ West
Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi
4
IN THE COURT OF SH. RAJ KAPOOR, LD. ADDITIONAL SESSIONS
JUDGE - 2 : WEST/ TIS HAZARI COURTS: DELHI.
Sessions Case No. 266/1/10
Assigned to Sessions. 17.09.07
Arguments heard on 05/08/11
Date of order. 08.11.2011
FIR No. 191/07
State Vs 1. Asgar Ahmed s/o Hamid R/o
Purana Bazar, near Jumma
Masjid, Kairana Distt. Mujaffar
Nagar, U.P.
2. Wakil Ahmad s/o Asgar Ahmad
R/o As above.
3. Smt. Meena Begam w/o Babu
Khan R/o Gali no. 3, Chaman
park, Mustafabad, Delhi.
4. Mustkin /o Maseullh R/o Jhuggi
no.21/17, Indira Camp,
Kalyanpuri, New Delhi.
Police Station Special Cell
Under Section 489 B & 489 C / 34 IPC.
JUDGEMENT
1. The brief facts of the case as per version of PW1 Insp. Akshay Kumar, Crime Branch, Anti Robbery Cell, R K Puram, New Delhi are that few days prior to 26.05.2007 he received a secret information in his office 5 that one Asgar Ahmed along with his son Wakil would come to India along with huge amount of fake currency notes from Pakistan and that he would be supplying those fake currency notes in various states of India namely Delhi, UP, Haryana and Rajasthan and Punjab. It has also been informed that he is associated in this work with his son Wakil . As a result of which economy of our country is being effected adversely.
2. On 26.05.2007 HC Parmod informed that he had received a secret information to the effect that accused Asgar Ahmed along with his son Vaikil and one lady who had gone to Mumbai on 24.05.2007 would come back Delhi on 26.05.2007 with huge amount of fake Indian Currency Notes and would deliver the same at Ajmeri Gate parking side of New Delhi Railway Station and that 'deal' would take place with Asgar Ahmed by calling him "Hafiz Ji". This information was recorded vide DD no.9, copy of which is mark A. This information was further passed to Insp.
and ACP of Interstate Cell. ACP ordered Insp. Jitendere Singh to conduct the raid immediately. Inspector Jitender Singh organized a raiding party consisting of ASI Rishi Ram, Insp. Akashay Kumar, HC 6 Pramod, HC Vijender, HC Veerpal, HC Dilawar, HC Naseem, HC Naresh, Ct. parvez Alam, Ct. Sunil, lady Ct. Maju and Ct. Rajkumar and other police personnels.
3. Raiding party left the office at about 11:30 a.m. in two government vehicles i.e. one Qualish bearing no.0517 and other was Gypsy along with secret informer. They reached at the parking of New Delhi Railway Station of Ahmeri Gate side at about 12 noon via Gol Dak Khana, Connaught Place and Minto Bridge.
4. On reaching there, Insp. Jitender Singh briefed the members of the raiding party. Both the vehicles were parked on the south side of Ajmeri Gate parking. Passersby were asked to join the raiding party but none agreed to join and they all left expressing their difficulties and left without telling their names and addresses.
5. HC Vijender was in Civil Dress. He was directed to become decoy customer. Articles of personal search of HC Vijeder were seized vide 7 memo Ex.PW1/A, these articles were purse and identity card of HC Vijender. Thereafter, Insp. Akshay Kumar took out five currency notes of Rs.1000/ denomination and signed them and handed over to decoy customer HC Vijender to perform deal with accused persons for purchasing fake Indian Currency notes in lieu of said genuine notes.
HC Vijender was also instructed to make gesture by raising his both hands after striking the deal. In the meanwhile raiding party was divided in two teams. Insp. Akshay Kumar inquired about the time of arrival of Firozpur Janta Express about which the secret informer informed them.
Said train was late by half an hour. Both team held Nakabandi one at the East side and other team held Nakabandi on West side of Rail Yatri Niwas.
6. On 26.05.2007 at about 2 p.m. accused Asgar Ahmed, accused Wakil and accused Meena Begum reached at the Gate of Rail Yatri Niwas and on the pointing out of secret informer, HC Vijender was sent to near these accused persons to make deal with them. At about 2:15 p.m., HC Vijender raised both his hands to make gesture as per direction and 8 these three accused persons were apprehended with the help of all the members of both the teams. After apprehending these three accused persons, Insp. Akshay Kumar asked five persons who had gathered there from the crowd to join the investigation but they also did not join.
HC Vijender handed over 20 currency notes in the denomination of Rs.
500/.
7. On checking these currency notes, these appeared to be fake on bare perusal in touch as well as sight. He prepared the list of the numbers mentioned in those twenty currency notes which appeared to be fake vide list Ex.PW1/B. I.O. had also prepared a handing over memo of five currency notes of Rs.1000/ denomination vide Ex.PW1/C. He kept the recovered twenty notes of Rs.500/ denomination in a polythene and sealed them with the help of the tape and that parcel was given serial no.1 and was taken into possession vide possession memo Ex.PW1/D.
8. From accused Asgar Ahmed five currency notes of Rs.1000/ denomination from the front left pocket of his Kurta, were recovered , 9 which IO had given to HC Vijender to deal with the accused, vide Memo Ex.PW1/E and when the string of the wearing Pajma of accused was untied, one angcha (tin towel) was found tied around the waist of accused Asgar Ahmed. On opening that angocha, four deck (bundles) each having currency notes of Rs.500/ denomination, were recovered.
These bundles were given serial no.3,4, 5 and 6. Accused Asgar was also holding black colour bag having blue colour pocket and a sticker of polo spot was affixed on pockets. On checking that bag, two more bundles of Rs.500/ denomination were recovered wrapped in a newspapers. These two bundles were given seal no.7 and 8. A list of recovered notes was prepared serial wise along with their number vide Ex.PW1/F1 to PW1/F6. Six parcels along with parcel of bag were taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW1/G.
9. Thereafter, handbag of accused Meena Begum was checked. It was found to containing six bundles of fake currency notes in the denomination of Rs.500/ wrapped in a yellow colour polythene.
Separate lists of numbers of those currency notes were prepared vide 10 Ex.PW1/H1 to Ex.PW1/H6. PW1 observed that twenty notes which were given to him by HC Virender after striking the seal had same number mentioned in the list of 29 note vide Ex.PW1/H1. The bag along with yellow colour polythene was converted into parcel with the help of white cloth and was sealed with the seal of AK. The six bundles of currency notes were put in separate transparent polythenes and were sealed with seal of AK and these parcels were given serial numbers from 9 to 14. These six parcels of currency notes along with the parcel of bag recovered from accused Meena Begum was seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW1/J.
10.Thereafter, third accused Wakil Ahmed was checked but nothing incriminating was recovered from him. Accused Wakil Ahmad had taken part in making a deal with HC Vijender.
11.Then, I.O. prepared a rukka vide Ex.PW1/M and sent HC Parmod to police station NDLS for getting a formal FIR registered. IO/PW1 Akshay Kumar informed his office about this case with the request to send ASI 11 Devender Kumar for further investigation of this case.
12.After registration of this case, investigation was marked to ASI Devender who along with Ct. Ravinder reached at New Delhi, Railway Station, Ajmeri Gate side opposite Ashoka Yatri Niwas where SI Akshay Kumar, Insp. Jitender Kundu were already present with staff and three accused persons were in their custody namely Asgar Ahmed, Wakil Ahmed and Meena Begum. PW1 Insp. Akshay Kumar handed over seizure memo of all the recovered articles. He also produced these accused persons along with the sealed case property. At the instance of SI Akshay Kumar, PW16 SI Devender prepared the site plan vide Ex.PW1/Q. He recorded the statement of SI Akshay Kumar and thereafter, he was relieved along with HC Vijender and HC Pramod. Thereafter, accused persons were interrogated throughly and thereafter they were arrested in this case vide arrest memo of Asgar Ahmed Ex.PW13/A, Wakil Ahmed as Ex.PW13/B and Meena Begum as Ex.PW13/C.
13.During the casual search of accused Asgar Ahmed four mobile phones 12 were recovered, out of four, one was of Reliance and the other three were of Nokia 1110. Mobile Phone of Reliance was converted into sealed pulanda and sealed with the seal of DK. Other these mobiles were not sealed. Sealed pulanda of mobile phone of Reliance LG is taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex.PW13/G and the other three phones were seized vide Ex.PW13/H. One rail ticket was also recovered from Asgar Ahmed of Ferozpur Janta Express. The said ticket was pasted on a paper and same was seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW13/J. Rail ticket is Ex.PW13/K.
14.From the casual search of Wakil Ahmed two bills of Nokia 1110 of M/s Kumar Brothers Radio were recovered, same were also seized after pasting on two papers vide seizure memo of cash memo as Ex.PW13/L.
15.Accused Meena Begum produced two documents i.e. grant of visa to Meena Begum and residential permit vide seizure memo Ex.PW13/M. Documents are Marked as mark 13A and mark 13/B (These documents were issued by the official of govt. of Pakistan).
1316.Personal search of Asgar was conducted vide personal search memo Ex.PW13/D. Personal search of Wakil Ahmed was also conducted vide Ex.PW13/E. Personal search of Meena Begum was also conducted through lady constable vide memo is Ex.PW13/F. Disclosure statement of Asgar Ahemd was recorded vide Ex.PW13/N. Wakil Ahmed also made disclosure statement vide Ex.PW13/P and Meena Begum also gave disclosure statement vide Ex.PW13/Q.
17.On 31.05.2007, PW16 IO/ SI Devender along with SI Akshay Kumar, Ct.
Surender, HC Pramod, Ct. Sanjay raided at Jhuggi Kalyan Puri on the pointing out of accused Asgar Ahmed. At that time Wakil Ahmed was also with them. They tried to apprehend Mustkin on the pointing out of Asgar Ahmed but Musstkin was not found there and when they were going towards Chand Cinema along with both accused persons, the accused Mustkin was found standing on road in front of Chand Cinema. Mustkin was apprehended on the pointing out of accused Asgar Ahmed. On the casual search of Mustkin, 20 currency notes of 14 five hundred denomination were recovered from right side pocket of wearing pant. Notes were checked. After seeing that IO felt that these are counterfeit notes. He prepared the list of notes. In the list, he mentioned the number of notes vide list Ex.PW7/E. Thereafter 20 currency notes were sealed with the seal of DK vide seizure memo Ex.PW7/D.
18.Accused Mustkeen was interrogated and arrested in this case vide arrest memo Ex.PW7/A and Personal search memo Ex.PW7/E. Accused Mustkeen made a disclosure statement vide Ex.PW7/C. Case property was deposited with MHC(M) who made entry in register no.19.
19.Accused Asgar Ahmed and Wakil were produced before Ld. ACMM on 01.06.2007 where IO further requested the court for extension of PC remand. After considering request, Ld. ACMM extended two days PC remand. Thereafter, both accused persons led the police party at shop no. 581, Lajpat Rai Market and pointed out the shop of Kumar Brothers Radios. IO prepared the pointing out memo Ex.PW4/A. IO served 15 notice under section 91 Cr.P.C. upon owner Vipin Kumar and asked for bill books. He handed over these bill book, invoice in on 03.06.2007. He also gave reply to the notice issued under section 91 Cr.P.C. Bill book, text invoice and reply of Vipin Kumar were seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW4/C. Reply is Ex.PW4/D, invoice is Ex.PW14/B and the bill book is Ex.PW20.
20.On 01.06.2007, both accused persons led the police part at 4099, Bukhari House, Urdu Bazar, Jama Masjid. Accused pointed out the office of Syed Tuhameer Bukhari. IO prepared the pointing out memo Ex.PW5/A. Notice under section 91 Cr.P.C. was served upon shopkeeper Tuhameer Bukhari in reply, he handed over book of exchange order on 29.06.2007 and produced duplicate ticket of Aeroplane Delhi to Mumbai. The exchange order book is Ex.PW5/C. He had also produced invoice of air ticket, same was seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW5/B and the air ticket Ex.PW5/E.
21.On 02.06.2007, he along with members of police team went to Kirana 16 Mujaffar Nagar and conducted the house search of accused persons Asgar Ahmed and Wakil Ahmed but nothing was recovered.
22.On 08.06.2007, SI Akshay Kumar moved an application for taking the voice sample of both the accused persons. On 26.06.2007 by the order of Ld. MM, handed over two pulandas sealed with the seal of VP containing the cassettes. Both the pulandas were seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW16/C.
23.On 02.07.2007, Ct. Ravinder was sent to currency note press, Nasik Road, Maharashtra vide RC No. 113/21 along with the pulandas of recovered notes. He returned back on 09.07.2007, IO recorded his statement and recorded the statement of MHC(M).
24.The mobile phone of Reliance which was recovered from possession of Asgar Ahmed was put on surveillance before this incident. IO went to the office of ISC Chankya Puri on 08/09.07.2007 and prepared the call details script about the mobile phone of Reliance. Through this 17 telephone 52 calls were received during 05.02.2007 to 22.05.2007. Total 82 pages are collectively Ex.PW16/C (1 to 82).
25.On 09.07.2007, these call details were recorded in one CD by the operator Ct. Bhagwan Dass. He handed over CD. CD was converted into sealed pulanda and sealed with the seal of DK. Same was seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW8/A. This CD was sent to CFSL Lodhi Road along with the CDs voice sample through HC Pramod Kumar vide RC No.114/21.
26.After completion of the usual investigation of the case, case file was sent to court for judicial verdict.
27.This case was committed to this Court and received on 17.09.2007 for trial as it pertains to the heinous crime committed under section 489B and 489 C IPC which is exclusively triable by court of Sessions. Ld. predecessor of this court framed a charge on 18.12.2007 for the offences punishable u/s 489 B & 489 C / 34 IPC against accused persons to 18 which accused persons did not plead guilty and claimed trial.
28.To prove and substantiate its case the prosecution has examined 17 witnesses namely PW1 Insp. Akshay Kumar member of raiding party conducted on 26.05.2007, PW2 Ct. Kuldeep - formal witness being DD writer on 26.05.2007; PW3 HC Vijender - member of raiding party conducted on 26.05.2007; PW4 Vipin Kumar - public witness - hostile on material aspects; PW5 Sayed Tuahameer - owner of Bukhari Tour and Travels Pvt. Ltd.; PW6 Deepak Kumar Tanwar, Sr. Scientific Officer
- he examined the counterfeit currency notes; PW7 Ct. Surender -
witness to effect of arrest of accused Mustkin on 31.05.2007; PW8 Ct.
Bhagwan Sahay Meena - formal witness being Computer Operator on 11.07.07 who prepared CD of call details of phone number 9358015033;
PW9 Md. Taufiq - Security Incharge - Air Daccan Air Lines at IGI Airport
- he affirmed the fact that as per their record accused persons Meena Begum, Asgar and Samir traveled to Mumbai from Delhi; PW10 HC Anil Kumar - formal witness being MHCM on 26.05.2007 at PS New Delhi Rly. Station; PW11 Mr. Vidhya Prakash, Add. Sr. Civil Judge; PW12 19 HC Krishan Pal - another formal witness being Duty Officer at PS NDLS on 26.05.2007, he got exhibited the copy of FIR as Ex.PW12/A; PW13 HC Ravinder - he accompanied the IO at the time of raid; PW14 Ct.
nd Sanjay Kumar - he accompanied the 2 IO i.e.PW16 Devender; PW15 HC Pramod Kumar - another member of raiding party; PW16 SI Devender 2 IO of the case; and PW17 HC Davis Vijay - formal nd witness being MHCM on 02.07.2007 at PS NDRS.
FORMAL WITNESSES
29.PW2 Kuldeep is a formal witness in this case being DD writer in the office of ISC Crime Branch , New Delhi. He came to the witness box along with Roznamcha pertaining to DD no.9, 11 and 14 dated 26.05.2007. This witness got exhibited the same as Ex.PW1/K and PW1/L. He has also got exhibited the DD no.14 as Ex.PW2/A with regard to departure of ASI Devender and Ct. Ravinder. This witness has been crossexamined at length. No contrary evidence has come on record.
2030.PW4 Sh. Vipin Kumar came to the witness box and deposed that his father is a Proprietor of Kumar Bros. Radios at Lajpat Rai Market, Chandni Chowk Delhi. He used to sit at aforesaid shop. He has seen cash memo no. 3413 and 3414 dt: 23.05.20007, which had been issued in connection of selling two mobile phones make NOKIA 1110 to the customer. Detail of the EMIE No. are mentioned in the cash memos, which are Ex. PW.4/A and PW.4/B both bears his signatures at point A. This witness further deposed that on 03.06.2007 he handed over cash memo book having carbon copy of aforesaid cash memos and other cash memos and dome blank cash memos to the police, same was seized vide seizure memo Ex. PW.4/C, which bears his signatures at point A. This witness correctly identified the same as belongs to his shop and having carbon copy of cash memos issued by him. Cash memo book is Ex. P20. He had also submitted his written request on the letterhead of our shop to the police, same is Ex. PW.4/D, which bears his signatures at point A. This witness further deposed that he cannot identify to whom he had sold the aforesaid mobile phones. He also cannot identify, who was brought by the police to his shop on 21 01.06.2007 on seeing the signatures on the seizure memo Ex. PW.
4/E, bearing his signatures at point A. This witness stated that he put his signatures at his shop on the request of the police. This witness has been got declared hostile by ld. APP. This witness has not been crossexamined by defence counsel.
31.PW5 Sayed Tuahameer came to the witness box and deposed that he has been running business of tour and travel agency in the name and style of Bukhari Tour and Travel Pvt. Ltd. at the above said address since last about 56 years. He used to book the tickets of aeroplane etc. On 01.06.2007 accused Asgar Ahmed and Wakil Ahmed (correctly identified ) had come at his office i.e. Bikhari Tour and Travel Agency Pvt. Ltd and accused persons identified his office and at that time he had also identified both the said accused persons as the same persons those had purchased tickets from him of aeroplane for going to Mumbai. Pointing out memo cum identification memo to this effect of accused Asgar Ahmed and Wakil Ahmed is Ex. PW5/A which bears his signatures at point A1. This witness further deposed that on the notice 22 of IO he had gone in the office of IO at Chankya Puri on 29.06.2007 where he produced his bill book of serial no. 1351 to 1400 of 2006 to 2007 of Bukhari Tour and Travels Pvt. Ltd wherein he made necessary entries vide bill no. 1400 dt. 23.05.2007 in the name of accused Asgar.
He had also handed over one invoice No. DS/5576 dt. 23.05.2007 issued in the name of Ms. Meena issued by Ish Low Fare Travels Pvt. Ltd and said bill book to the IO and invoice were taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex. PW5/B which bears his signatures at point B1. Bill book containing receipt No. 1351 to 1400 of 2006 to 2007 is Ex. PW5/C collectively and receipt bearing no. 1400 issued in the name of Asgar is Ex. PW5/D which bears his signature at point D1. Invoice no. DS/5576 dt. 23.05.2007 in the name of Ms. Meena issued from Ish Low Fare Travels Pvt. Ltd is Ex. PW5/E. This witness has been crossexamined at length. I have perused the same. I found some minor type of contradictions which are attributable due to the long duration of time and memory of a human being.
32.PW6 Mr. Deepak Kumar Tanwar, Sr. Scientific Officer, CFSL, CBI, New 23 Delhi came to the witness box and deposed that he received three parcels in his office marked Q1 , S1 and S2 with the specimen sealed impression of DK and VP. Parcel marked 1 found containing one CD in which 51 audio files were found recorded. Parcel S1 and S2 were found specimen voice of Asgar Ahmad and Wakil Ahmad. This witness further deposed that compact disk markd Q1 and Hi8 audio video cassettes marked S1 and S2 were rechecked for continuity or original sound and found in order. These were returned to the forwarding authority along with their original packing in three separately sealed parcel sealed with the seal of 'DKT SSOII CFSL CBI, New Delhi.
In this regard he prepared a detailed report comprising of 46 pages and got exhibited the same as Ex.PW6/A. This witness identified the audio video Hi8 cassette as Ex.P1 (voice sample of accused Asgar Ahmed);
audiovideo Hi8 cassette as Ex.P2 (voice sample of accused Wakil Ahmad); and Compact Dist as Ex.P3. This witness has been cross examined at length. I have perused the same. No contrary evidence has come on record which may go to the root of this case.
2433. PW8 Ct. Bhagwan Sahay Meena came to the witness box and deposed that on 11.07.2007 he was posted at Inter State Cell, Crime Branch, Delhi as a Computer Operator. As per the direction of IO, he prepared CD of the call details recorded before investigation of this case.
The call details CD of phone number 9358015033 were handed over to the IO of this case. Same were seized by the seizure memo Ex. PW8/A. IO had also seized the CD after converted into a sealed pullanda sealed with the seal of DK. This witness correctly identified the CD as Ex.
P8/1. This witness has also been crossexamined at length. I have perused the same. No material contradiction has come on record which may go to the root of this case.
34.PW9 Md. Taufiq, Security Incharge Kingfisher Airlines, posted at IGI Airport, New Delhi came to the witness box and deposed that on 24.05.2007 he was posted as Security Incharge in Air Deccan Air lines at IGI Airport. As per their record three persons namely Meena Begum, Asgar and Samir travelled to Mumbai from Delhi by the flight of Air Daccan. The police officials issued a notice u/s 91 Cr.PC to Air Port 25 Manager, Air Deccan, IGI Air Port, New Delhi. IO of this case asked for record about the passengers who traveled from Delhi to Mumbai on 24.05.2007 around 6.00 am. The notice was marked to him. Copy of notice is Ex. PW9/A. In compliance to the notice he handed over the record to the IO of this case. The attested copy of the records is Ex.
PW9/B. He collected this copy from his ticketing record office. It also bears the seal of their department at point A. It is a computer generated record. This witness has been crossexamined at length. I have perused the same. No contrary evidence has come on record which may go to the root of this case.
35. PW10 HC Anil Kumar came to the witness box and deposed that on 26.05.2007 he was posted at PS New Delhi Rly Station as MHC(M). On the said day Io SI Akshay Kumar had deposited the case property in case FIR No. 191/07 PS NDLS. This witness got exhibited the relevant entries in register no. 19 as Ex. PW 10/A. Ld. defence counsel cross examined this witness. No contrary evidence has come on record which may affect the case.
2636. PW11 Mr. Vidhya Paraksh, Addl. Sr. Civil Judge (as he then was), Delhi (Central), Tis Hazari Courts Delhi came to the witness box and deposed that on 22.06.2007 he was posted as MM Delhi. On the application of the IO marked to him vide order dated 18.06.2007 of the court of the Ld. ACMM, he had conducted the proceedings regarding taking the voice sample of accused Asgar Ahmed and Vakeel Ahmed on 26.06.2007. His order dt. 22.06.2007 is Ex,. PW11/A. The proceedings regarding taking of voice sample of accused Asgar Ahmed and Vakeel Ahmed dt. 26.06.2007l is Ex. PW11/B and bears his signature at point A.B.C, and D. Application of the IO regarding permission to take voice sample is Ex. PW11/C and application for copy of proceedings and cassettes voice recording is Ex. PW11/D. The voice sample. The transcript of voice sample of Asgar Ahmed and Vakeel Ahmed is Ex.
PW11/E which bears his signatures at points A to U (running into 20 pages). This witness has not been crossexamined.
37.PW12 HC Krishan Pal, No. 108, Crime, RMD is a formal witness. He 27 appeared in the court and deposed that on 26.05.2007 he was posted at PS NDLS as Duty officer from 4.00 to 12.00 mid night. On that day at 6.55 pm HC Parmod produced a rukka before him. On the basis of said rukka he recorded the FIR. This witness got exhibited the copy of the FIR as Ex. PW12/A, which bears his signature at point A. After recording the FIR, copy of FIR original rukka handed over to HC Parmod. This witness has not been crossexamined.
RAIDING PARTY WITNESSES:
38.PW1 Insp. Akshay Kumar; PW3 HC Vijender; PW7 Ct. Surender;
PW13 HC Ravinder; PW14 Ct. Sanjay Kumar; PW15 HC Pramod Kumar; and PW16 SI Devender 2 IO of the case are the material nd witnesses in this case. They have deposed more or less on similar lines.
Therefore, for the sake of brevity and convenience depositions of PW3HC Vijender; PW7 Ct. Surender; PW13 HC Ravinder and PW15 HC Pramod are being reproduced which are as under: "PW3 HC Vijender On 26.05.2007 I was posted in aforesaid office. On that day, at about 9.30 am I was present in office alongwith other officials. S.I. Akshay informed me about the secret 28 information, which was in connection of bringing counterfeit currency notes from Bombay by one Asgar, his son Wakil Ahmad and one lady. It was also told to me by him that aforesaid three persons had gone to take counterfeit currency notes by airoplane to Bombay on 24.05.2007. SI Akshay further told to me that aforesaid three persons used to circulate counterfeit currency notes in the area of Delhi, Rajasthan, UP and Haryana. It was further told to me by SI Akshay Kumar that aforesaid three persons would come to Delhi by Firozpur Janta Express train and they shall collect at Ajmere Gate Parking, New Delhi Railway Station to deliver the counterfeit notes to some one. It was also told to me by SI Akshay Kumar that if one person wants to deal with aforesaid persons in the name of Hafiz Ji then he will success in dealing of counterfeit currency notes with them.
SI Akshay recorded aforesaid information in roznamcha after disclosing to me. ACP Dr. Joy Tirkky and Insp. Jitender Kundu were also informed about the aforesaid secret information. After getting permission from ACP, SI Akshay Kumar constituted raiding party with the help of myself, Insp. Jitender, SI Akshay Kumar, ASI Rishi, ASI Chiranji, HC Parmod, HC Veerpal, HC Dilawar, HC Nasim Khan, HC Naresh, Const. Parvez Alam, Const. Surender, Const. Sanjay, Const. Ved Parkash, Const. Bhagwan Sahai, Const. Anand and Const. Devender.
At about 11.30 AM under supervision and control of Insp. Jitender we all members of raiding party had travelled by two Government vehicles from our office and reached New Delhi Railway Station, Ajmere Gate side near Metro Station at about 12.00 noon. Our vehicles wee parked in the parking of Metro Railway Station. In front of Yatri Niwas where we all raiding party members were present, SI Akshay Kumar asked 10 passengers to join raiding party, disclosing the secret information to them, but none become ready and went away without disclosing their names and addresses.
We all raiding party members were briefed by Insp. Jitender and divided us in two groups. One group was headed by SI Akshay and second group was headed by Insp. Jitender. I was member of SI Akshay's group. Secret informer was also with SI Akshay at that time.
29First ground headed by SI Akshay took the position in Western Side of Rail Yatri Niwas and another group took the position towards Eastern Side of Rail Yatri Niwas. I have been directed by SI Akshay Kumar to deal with accused persons as decoy customer. I was in civil uniform and my belongings were taken by SI Akshay and handed over to HC Veerpal before direction. One seizure memo regarding taking into possession my belongings whatsoever with me at that time was prepared vide seizure memo Ex. PW1/A, which bears my signatures at Point B. SI Akshay handed over me 5 Indian currency notes of Rs. 1000 denomination each by putting his signatures on them saying that I have to go to make deal with accused persons disclosing my name as Hafiz Ji. One seizure memo was also prepared by SI Akshay Kumar in respect of handing over the aforesaid Indian currency notes. The same is Ex. PW1/C, which bears my signatures at Point B. I kept the aforesaid notes in my pocket to make deal. SI Akshay had directed me if I became success in dealing with accused persons then I shall make appointed signal to call all raiding members.
At about 12.45 SI Akshay went to make inquiry at New Delhi Railway Station with concerned official regarding arrival of train in which accused persons were coming to Delhi as per secret information after leaving all the members of raiding party near Rail Yatri Niwas. Within 10 minutes SI Akshay came near us and disclosed that concerned train is late for 30 minutes. We remained present in our position near Rail Yatri Niwas till 2.00 PM. In my presence secret informer pointed out towards three persons including one lady. Then secret informer left and SI Akshay Kumar directed me to make deal with three aforesaid persons pointed out by secret informer to SI Akshay Kumar.
One person who was wearing kurta pajama was asked about the deal disclosing my relation with Hafiz Ji and started to talk with him. He asked me 'Kitna maal chahiye'. Thereafter I handed over a sum of Rs. 5000/ which had been delivered to me by SI Akshay. He stated to me that he used to give a sum of Rs. 10,000/ in lieu of genuine Rs. 6,000/, but he become ready to give Rs. 10,000/ in lieu of genuine Rs. 5,000/ as it was first dealing with me. Name of 30 that person came to know later on as Asgar Ahmad accused present in court. (witness correctly identify accused Asgar Ahmad). Accused Asgar directed to one lady who was with them to hand over 20 notes of Rs. 500/ denomination each in lieu of my Rs. 5,000/. She did so from her hand bag of blue and red colour and produced before Asgar. Asgar handed over the same to me. On completion of deal I passed on signal by raising my hand as directed by SI Akshay to call raiding party members. All the raiding party members came at the spot and overpowered three accused persons, whose names came to notice lateron as Asgar Ahmad, Wakil Ahmad and Smt. Meena (witness correctly identified all the accused persons present in court). I produced 20 notes of rs. 5000 denomination belongings to deal to SI Akshay Kumar. Same were checked by SI Akshay and were found counterfiet. SI Akshay took into possession the same vide seizure memo Ex. PW1/D, which bears my signatures at Point B. IO converted aforesaid notes in a pullanda and sealed with the seal of AK. Seal after use was handed over to me. No. 1 was allotted to aforesaid pullanda. I cannot tell the number printed over 20 notes. I cannot tell the number of 5 notes handed over to me by SI Akshay Kumar before deal.
Thereafter SI Akshay took search of accused Asgar. From the left pocket of wearing kurta five genuine notes belongings to SI Akshay and handed over by him to me, were recovered. The same were taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex. PW1/E after converting in a parcel sealed with seal of AK and was given no. 2. The memo bears my signatures at Point B. Many persons were collected there at the time of taking search of accused Asgar. SI Akshay against asked 4/5 persons out of the gathering at the spot, but none agreed and went away without disclosing their names and addresses. Lady Const. Manju had accompanied us being member of raiding party from the office. SI Akshay had offered our personal search before all the three accused persons, but they refused for the same.
SI Akshay took further search of accused Asgar. One 'angocha' was tied with his belly from which 4 packet of counterfeit currency notes of 500 denomination each were recovered. IO prepared one list after counting the same, but I cannot tell number of recovered counterfeit notes from the 31 'angocha' of Asgar. Aforesaid notes were taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex. PW1/G, which bears my signaturs at Point B. Parcel was sealed with the seal of AK and SI. No. were allotted as 3,4,5, and 6. One bag of black colour was in the hand of accused Asgar. The same was also checked by SI Akshay. Two packets of Rs. 500 denomination of counterfeit notes wrapped in a newspaper piece were recovered. The same were also seized through aforesaid seizure memo Ex. PW1/G and Sl. No. wee allotted 7 and 8 after sealed with seal of AK. Piece of newspaper, 'angocha' and bag of accused Asgar was also taken into possession vide separate seizure memo after sealing with the seal of AK. The memo to this effect is not found on file. These articles have been seized vide seizure memo Ex. PW1/G. Thereafter with the help of Lady Const. Manju, SI Akshay took the search of accused Smt. Meena. Her bag of red and yellow colur was checked and 6 packets of counterfeit currency of Rs. 500 each were recovered. Same were taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex. PW1/J after converting in a parcel and sealing with the seal of AK and Sl. No. were allotted to the parcel as 9 to 14. The seizure memo bears my signatures at Point B. Nothing was recovered from accused Wakil Ahmad. Io had taken his search and prepared seizure memo to this effect. The same is Ex. PW1/P. Approximately Rs. 2,35,000/ in total counterfeit notes were recovered from accused Meena and Rs. 2,95,000/ and Rs. 10,000/ were recovered from accused Asgar. Thereafter SI Akshay prepared tehrir/rukka Ex. PW1/M, which bears my signatures of SI Akshay at Point A. HC Parmod took the rukka to Police Station at about 6.25 PM for registration of FIR. ASI Devender came at the spot at about 7.00 PM alongwith Const. Ravinder. At about 9.00 PM HC Parmod came at the spot with rukka and carbon copy of FIR which were delivered to ASI Devender for further investigation.
ASI Devender prepared site plan at the instance SI Akshay Kumar. SI Akshay Kumar delivered all the documents and sealed parcels to ASI Devender. Thereafter I, SI Akshay and HC Parmod left the spot and others remained with accused persons at the spot. Statement of 32 mine and HC Parmod were recorded in the office on the same night. I can identify the case property if shown to me.
At this stage, one sealed parcel duly sealed with CNP Nasik Mharashtra produced by MHC(M) is opened. 14 parcels are taken out. Out of same one does not bear any extra slip having serial numbers. Others having impression of seal DK and cut mark and particulars of the case and Sl. No. 15 also taken out. Parcel no. 1 contains 20 notes, parcel no. 3 contains 99 notes, parcel no. 4 contains 100 notes, parcel no. 5 contains 98 notes, parcel no. 6 contains 98 notes, parcel no. 7 contains 99 notes, parcel no. 8 contains 97 notes, parcel no. 9 contains 29 notes, parcel no. 12 contains 99 notes, parcel no. 13 contains 98 notes, parcel no. 14 contains 100 notes. All the notes are of the denomination of Rs. 500/. The same are shown to the witness. Packet having Sl. No. 1 which was delivered by accused Asgar to me in deal in lieu of original genuine notes. The same is EX. P1. Four packets having Sl. No. 3, 4, 5, 6 are also shown to the witness. He correctly identified to be the same which were recovered from 'angocha' of accused Asgar. The same are Ex. P3 to P6. Two packets having Sl. No. 7 and 8 are also shown to the witness. He correctly identified to be the same which were recovered from the bag of accused Asgar. The same are Ex. P7 and P8. Six parcels having Sl. No. 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 are shown to the witness. He correctly identified to be the same which were recovered from the bag of accused Meena. One parcel which does not have nay slip of Serial number was shown to the witnesss having 20 currency notes of Rs. 500/. The witness had not identified as same was not recovered in his presence. 13 polythene envelope having particulars of this case were also found in the aforesaid parcel. The same are shown to the witness. He correctly identified the same, in which IO had put recovered currency note packets and same are collectively exhibited as Ex. P15.
One sealed parcel duly sealed with the seal of AK produced by MHC(M) is opened. One black colour bag containing half sheet of newspaper and one 'angocha' are taken out. The same are shown to the witness. Witnesses correctly identified black colour bag, 'angocha' and half sheet of newspaper belongs to accused Asgar and the bag is Ex. P16, 'angocha is Ex. P17 and half sheet of newspaper is 33 Ex. P18.
Another sealed paracel duly sealed with AK produced by MHC(M) is opened. It contained blue and red colour bag. Out of which one black Burka, one yellow colour suit and one yellow colur plastic empty envelope are taken out. Witness identified the same belongs to accused Meena and collectively Ex. P18.
(Further examinationinchief deferred as the case property i.e. parcel no. 2 having 5 genuine note of Rs. 1000/ each has not been brought by the MHC (M).
At this stage, one sealed envelope sealed with the seal of A.K. is produced by the MHC (M), same is opened, it contains 5 notes of Rs. 1000/ denomination each, same are shown to the witness, who correctly identifies the same as handed over to me by SI Akshay Kumar and I used the same to purchase counterfeit notes from accused Asgar Ahmed and same are Ex. P19 (Colly).
PW7 Ct. Surender On 31.05.2007 I was posted as constable at ISC Crime Branch Chanakya Puri. On that day at 3.15 pm I joined investigation of this case and I with SI Akshay Kumar, SI Devender Kumar, HC Parmod, Ct. Alam, Ct. Sanjay went by government vehicle to Kalyan Puri along with accused Asgar Ahmed and Wakil were also with us. We were searching for Mustkin and Yasin Kalyan Puri area. We reached at jhuggi at Kalyanpuri but we could not find Mustkin and Yasin. Thereafter while searching for them we reached Chand Cinema at about 5 pm where Asgar accused pointed out towards a person standing in front of Chand Cinema whose name was later revealed as Mustkin S/o Masih Ulla residence of jhuggi no. 21/17 Indra Camp Kalyanpuri. He was apprehended accused Mustakin. IO asked 4 to 5 passerby to join the proceedings but they declined giving excuses. The IO then told accused Mustkin that his search was to be taken and he offered his own search to Mustkin who refused the offer saying that as he has already been apprehended he does not wish to take the search of the IO. The IO took search of accused Mustkin and from the right 34 side pocket of his trousers there were some currency notes of denomination of Rs. 500/ which on verification by the IO were found to be 20 in number. The currency notes were serial wise and their numbers were from 9AW751351 to 9AW751370. The said currency notes were counterfeit and fake. The IO told us that the paper light in weight and the print of the numbers were small. There was difference in the water mark. Accused Asgar told that the currency notes which were found in the possession of accused Mustkin have been given to accused Mustkin by him. Accused Mustkin also stated the same thing (objected to by the counsel of accused Mustkin as the same is in contravention of section 25 of Evidence Act). IO prepared list of the fake currency notes. The currency notes were sealed in an envelope with the seal of DK and the envelope was marked as serial no. 15. Seal after use was handed over to me. At about 6.15 pm IO arrested the accused Mustkin vide arrest memo Ex. PW7/A and it bears my signatures at point A. His personal search was conducted vide personal search memo Ex. PW7/B which bears my signatures at point A. Disclosure statement of accused Mustkin was also recorded Ex. PW7/C and it bears my signatures at point A. Currency notes were seized vide seizure memo Ex. PW7/D. List of currency notes recovered from accused Mustkin was also prepared which is Ex. PW7/E which bears my signatures at point A. (At this stage an envelope bearing court seal which is partially opened is opened and the contents are taken out). It contains one bundle containing 14 bundles of currency notes and the top most bundlebunch contains 20 notes alongwith an envelope containing details of currency notes. Witness has identified the 20 currency notes to be the same which were recovered from the possession of accused Mustkin same are identified by the witness and area collectively Ex. PX1. Accused Mustkin is present in the court and the witness has correctly identified accused Mustkin in the court.
PW13 HC Ravinder 7113 PCR, Special Cell, Sector6, Rohini On SA On 24.05.07 I was posted at ISC, Crime Branch, 35 Chanakya Puri as a Constable. On the date after receiving the DD No. 14 at 6.15 pm. I alongwith ASI Devender reached at Rail Yatri Niwas Ajmeri Gate side New Delhi Railway Station on motorcycle. SI Akshay Kumar alongwith Inspector Jitender Kundu and the other member of the staff were present there. Two government vehicles were also i.e one qualise and one jeepsy. The accused Asgar Ahmed, Vakeel Ahmed and Smt. Meena were also found there. The accused are present on the court. SI Akshay produced all the three accused persons before ASI Devender alongwith memos and list of fake notes and pullandas of fake notes.
HC Parmod reached spot after the registration of FIR and handed over the original rukka and copy of FIR to ASI Devender. ASI Devender incorporated the FIR no. in the documents/memos. On the basis of the pointing out of SI Akshay, ASI Devender prepared site plan. Io recorded the statement of SI Akshay HC Vijender and HC Parmod Kumar and thereafter they were relived from the investigation.
After explaining the facts and circumstances of this case as reason of arrest accused Asgar Ahmed, Vakeel Ahmed and Meena Begum were arrested in this case.
One mobile phone of Reliance (LG) was recovered from the possession of Asgar Ahmed same was converted into seal pullanda and sealed with the seal of DK and same were seized through seizure memo. Three phone of Nokia were also recovered from the possession of Asgar Ahmed same were also seized vide the separate memo. One rail ticket was also recovered from Asgar Ahmed of Firoz Pur JantaExpress dated 25.05.207. The said ticket was pasted on a paper and same was seized vide separate memo.
Two paper of cash memos were recovered from the possession of accused Vakeel Ahmed and same were also seized vide separate memo.
Personal search of above said accused persons were conducted and IO prepared the personal search memos. All the three accused persons were interrogated who made their disclosed statement, same were recorded separately. All the memos were signed by me. From the spot we went to New 36 Delhi Railway Station and the case property of this case was deposited in the Malkhana and thereafter we returned back to our office at Chanakya Puri.
On 2.07.07 as per the instruction of the IO of this case I collected the exhibits of this case from the MHC(M) New Delhi Railway station and went to Nasik Press, Nasik Road and exhibits were deposited there on 04.07.07. So long as the case property remain in my custody. It was not tempered by me or anyone. On 09.07.07 I came back to PS NDLS where I depositd the receipt with the MHCM NDLS and thereafter I came back to my office Chankaya Puri and informed about the IO who had record my statement in this matter.
Arrest memo of Asgar Ahmed is Ex.PW13/A which bears my signature at point A. Arrest memo of Vakeel Ahmed is Ex. PW13/B which bears my signature at point A. Arrest memo of Meena Begum EX. PW13/C which bears my signature at point A. Personal search memo of Asgar Ahmed Ex. PW13/D, Vakeel Ahmed Ex. PW13/E and Meena Begum Ex. PW13/F all the memo which bears my signature at point A. Seizure memo mobile phone of Reliance (LG) Ex. PW13/G . Seizure memo of three mobile phone with sim is Ex. PW13/H and the seizure memo of rail ticket is Ex. PW13/J all the memo which bears my signature at point A. The railway ticket dated 25.05.07 is EX. PW13/K which bears my signature at point A. Seizure memo of cash memo recovered from Vakeel Ahmed is Ex. PW13/L memo bears my signature at point A and the cash memo is Ex. PW4/B and PW4/A. Seizure memo of documents were recovered from Meena Begum is Ex. PW13/M which bears my signature at point A and the documents are marked Ex. PW13/A and PW13/B. The first statement of Asgar Ahmed is Ex. PW13/N. The first statement of Vakeel Ahmed is Ex. PW13/P. The first statement of Meena Begum is Ex. PW13/Q. All the disclosed statement which bears my signature at point A. PW15 HC Pramod Kumar On 26.05.2007, I was posted as HC in ISC/Crime Branch, Chankya Puri, New Delhi. On the date secret informer 37 reached in the office and informed me that Asgar and his son Wakil Ahmed had gone to Mumbai on 24.05.2007 by Air along with lady and they will return with fake currency in huge quantity and they will get down at New Delhi Railway Station from Ferozpur Janta Express and after getting down from the train they will come towards Azmeri Gate side and will deliver the fake note today. He can be apprehended if any will deal them after using the word "Hafiz ji" (Un sai hafiz ji ka aadmi keh kar sauda kiya ja sakta hai).
I informed about this information to SI Akshay Kumar. SI Akshay Kumar had informed Inspector and ACP Crime Branch about this information. SI Akshay Kumar made DD entry in this effect vide DD No.9 at 10 a.m. In the supervision of Inspector Jitender Kundoo a raiding party was constituted comprising with ASI Rishi Ram, ASI Chiranji Lal, HC Vijender, HC Veer Pal, HC Dilawar, HC Naresh, HC Naseem Khan, Ct. Surender, Ct. Sunil, Ct. Parvez Alam, Ct. Sanjay, Ct. Bhagwan Sahay, Ct. Ishwar and WCt. Manju. All the above stated member of raiding party had left office in two government vehicles vide DD No.11 at 11:30 a.m. We reached at Azmeri Gate side of New Delhi Railway Station via Gole Dak Khana, Connaught Place. All the members of the staff were briefed at Azmeri Gate and driver of both the vehicles were directed to park their vehicles in a southern side. SI Akshay Kumar asked ten passengers to act as witness after disclosing in contents of secret information but those persons had left the spot explaining their genuine ground of nonjoining the raid. Without waste of time SI Akshay Kumar deputed HC Vijender as a decoy customer, Personal search of HC Vijender was conducted at that time he was having purse along with ICard and other papers and money. Same were handed over to HC Veer Pal. A separate memo was prepared in this regard.
Five notes of one thousand denomination were handed over to HC Vijender by SI Akshay Kumar. All the notes were signed by SI Akshay Kumar. HC Vijender was also directed to enter into deal after giving reference of "Hafiz ji ka aadmi". HC Vijender had left the other member of team along with secret information with purpose to purchase fake currency notes from Asgar, Wakil and lady. All other members of team were divided into two parts. The first party which was deployed in West side and the second party was 38 deployed in East side. The first party was comprising with ASI Rishi Ram, SI Akshay Kumar, Ct. Surender, Ct. Sanjay, Ct. Parvez Alam and myself and the second party was comprising with Inspector Jitender Kundoo and other staff.
At about 12:45 p.m, SI Akshay Kumar went to Railway Enquiry Office and verify about Ferozpur Janta Express. The enquiry officer informed him that train is delayed by thirty minutes/half an hour. He again came back from his place and started waiting arrival of train. At about 02:15 PM HC Vijender signaled towards the member of raiding party. As per the directions of the SI Akshay Kumar all the member of raiding party rushed to Rail Yatri Niwas and two persons and one lady were over powered. On interrogation those persons revealed their name as Asgar Ahmed,Wakil Ahmed and Lady disclosed his name as Meena Begum. (Wakil Ahmed is not present in Court. His identity is not disputed). Accused Asgar and Meena present in the Court. HC Vijender had produced 20 notes of 500 denomination and he told to SI Akshay Kumar that he had purchased these fake currency notes after dealing with Asgar Ahmed and Wakil Ahmed. HC Vijender further disclosed that the dealing was settled with Asgar Ahmed, Wakil Ahmed and notes were handed over to him by Asgar Ahmed after taking the notes from accused Meena and the fake notes were in the bag of Meena. He told that he handed over the signed notes of Rs.5000/ to Asgar Ahmed.
The notes were checked by SI Akshay Kumar from printing, thread of note on which RBI is written and the quality of papers, notes were looking like fake notes. The twenty notes of 500 denomination which is purchased by HC Vijender from accused persons were seized vide separate memo. SI Akshay Kumar introduced himself to accused Asgar Ahmed stating that he is member of police party and accused has right to take personal search of him (SI Akshay Kumar). Asgar told that he do not want to take search as he is already apprehended by the police. Both the government vehicles were called at the spot through me.
Casual search of Asgar was conducted by SI Akshay Kumar. Five signed notes of 1000 denomination were recovered from the front pocket of kurta (kurte ki chaati wali jeb sai paanch note daskhat kiye hue baramat hue). The notes were kept in a sealed pulenda after sealed with the seal of AK. 20 notes of 500 denomination which was purchased 39 by HC Vijender were also sealed with the seal of AK.
On the further search of Asgar Ahmed four bundles of notes were recovered from angocha which was tied in the vest under the pajama. On further checking of black bag, which was in the hand of Asgar Ahmed on which POLO was written, two bundles of notes wrapped in a newspaper were recovered. All the bundles of notes were marked as Mark 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8. A list of serial numbers of notes were separately prepared. All the bundles of notes were sealed separately after sealing the same with the seal of AK and pulendas were marked as stated above.
The POLO bag, the angocha and the newspaper dated 24.05.2007 namely Sahara Samay were sealed in a separate pulenda after putting the newspaper and angocha in the POLO bag. IO used the seal of AK in sealing the pulendas.
Bag of Meena Begum was checked by SI Akshay Kumar a yellow colour polythene on which Jafrabad New Seelam Pur was written was recovered, it was containing six bundles of notes. Serial number of notes were noted separately on separate sheet and all the bundles were separately put on a transparent polythene and same were converting into sealed pulenda and seal with the seal of AK and same were marked as 9 to 14. The bag was separately seized after converting into sealed pulenda and sealed with the seal of AK.
Lastly search of Wakil Ahmed was conducted but nothing incriminating was recovered from him. Seal after use was handed over to HC Vijender. SI Akshay Kumar prepared rukka and handed over me with direction for registration FIR at PS NDLS. I reached therewhere duty officer had recorded the FIR. Thereafter, I came back to the spot at 09:00 p.m. I handed over the copy of FIR and original rukka to ASI Devender, second IO.
On 11.07.2007 IO ASI Devender handed over me one sealed envelope sealed with the seal of DK, one FSL form and photocopy of scripts to deposit the same at CSFL, Lodhi Road. As per the direction of ASI Devender, I reached at Maal Khana New Railway Station and collected two envelopes S1 and S2, sealed with the seal of VP and two sample seals of VP, vide RC No.114/21/07. I went to CFSL Delhi and deposited the same. Thereafter, I returned back to 40 Maal Khana PS NDLS and handed over the receipt to MHCM, so long as the case property remain in my custody its sealed were remained intact and it was not tampered be me or anyone.
DD No.9 is Ex. PW1/K, DD No.11 is Ex. PW1/L. Personal search of HC Vijender Singh is Ex. PW1/A, which bears my signature at point C. Memo of handing over five notes of 1000 denomination isEx. PW1/C, which bears my signature at point C. Seizure memo of twenty notes which were purchased from Asgar Ahmed by HC Vijdender is Ex. PW1/D, which bears my signature at point C. Recovery memo of five singed notes of 1000 denomination is Ex. PW1/E, which bears my signature at point C. Sealed pulandaof notes recovered from Asgar Ahmedand his bag and bag is Ex. PW1/G, which bears my signature at point C. Seizure memo of notes recoveredfrom Meena Begum and her bag is Ex. PW1/J, which bears my signature at point B. Listof number of twenty fake currency notes Ex. PW1/B which bears my signature at point B. List of fake currency notes of bundles marked 3,4,5,6,7 and 8 are Ex. PW1/F1 to 1/F6, which bears my signature at point B. List of numberof fake currency notes of bundles 9,10,11,12,13,14are Ex. PW1/Hto 1/H6, which bears my signatureat point B. Non recovery memo of Wakil Ahmed is Ex. PW1/P, which bears my signature at point B. At this stage, one sealed parcel duly sealed with Court seal produced by MHCM is opened. 14 parcels are taken out. Out of same does not bear any extra slip having serial no. Others having serial no.1,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13 and 14. One envelope having impression of seal AK and cut mark and particulars of the case and S. No.15 are also taken out. Parcel No.1 contains 20 notes, parcel no.3contains99 notes, parcel 6 contains 98 notes, parcel 7 contains 99 notes, parcel no.8 contains 97 notes, parcel 9 contains 29 notes, parcel no.10 contains 48 notes, parcel no.13 contains 98 notes, parcel no.14 contains 100 notes. All the notes are of the denomination of Rs.500/.the same are shown to the witness. Packet having S.No.1 which was delivered by accused Asgar to HC Bijender in deal in lieu of original genuine notes. The same is Ex. P1. Four packets having S.No.3,4,5,6 are also shown to the witness. He correctly identified to be the same which were recovered from 41 Angocha of accused Asgar. The same are Ex. PW3 to P6. Two packets having S.No.7 and 8 are also shown to the witness. He correctly identified to be the same which were recovered from the bag of accused Asgar. The same are Ex. P7and P8. Six parcels having S.No.9,10,11,12,13 and 14areshown to the witness. He correctly identified to be the same which were recovered from the bag of accused Meena. One parcel which does not have any slip of S.No. was shown to the witness having twenty counterfeit notes of Rs.500/. the witness had not identified as same was not recovered in his presence. 13 polythene envelope having particulars of this case were also found in the aforesaid parcel. The same are shown to the witness. He correctly identified the same in which IO had put recovered currency note packets and same are collectively Ex.P15. One sealed parcel duly sealed with the seal of Court produced by MHCM is opened. One black colour bag containing half sheet of newspaper and one angocha are taken out. The same are shown to the witness. Witness correctly identified black colour bag 'angocha' and half sheet of newspaper belongs to accused Asgar and the bag is Ex.P16, Angocha is Ex.P17 and half sheet of newspaper is Ex.P18.
Another sealed parcel duly sealed with court produced by MHCM is opened. It contains blue and red colour bag. Out of which one black burka, one yellow colour suit and one yellow colour plastic empty envelope are taken out. Witness identified the same belongs to accused Meena and collectively Ex.P18/A. At this state, one court sealed envelope produced by MHCM is opened. It contains 5 notes of Rs.1000/ denomination each. Same are shown to th witness who correctly identifies the same as handed over to HC Vijender by SI Akashy Kumar and same were used to purchase counterfeit notes from accused Asgar, 5 genuine notes of 1000/ denomination each are collectively Ex.P19 , 5 notes bearing signature of SI Akshay at point A."
39.All these material witnesses have been crossexamined at length by the defence counsel. I have perused the same. I found some 42 contradictions in the depositions of these material witnesses. But these contradictions are not major and appears minor type of contradictions which are attributable due to the long duration of time and memory of a human being.
40.After recording statement of prosecution witnesses, statements of accused persons u/s 313 Cr. PC were recorded . Accused persons pleaded that they are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the present case. In their defence they produced two defence witnesses namely DW1 Anis and DW2 Sehnaj.
41.DW1 Anis, S/o Rafiq Ahmad, Aged about 25 years, R/o Mahulla Khel Kala, Kherana City, Mujafarnagar, U.P. came to the witness box and deposed that on 25.05.2007, he was sitting outside his aforesaid house at about 120:001 noon. 45 persons in civil dress came in a TATA Sumo Vehicle at the resident of Asgar Ahmad and Wakil Ahmad and they started taking away in TATA Sumo Vehicle. This witness asked those person as to who they were and as to where they have been taking 43 Asgar and Wakil Ahmad. They stated that they are official of crime Branch, Chanakya Puri, Delhi Police and they were taking Asgar and Wakil Ahmad for some interrogation purpose. Thereafter those persons had taken both of them along with them. At about 03.00Pm he alongwith family members of Asgar and Wakil Ahmad came to Chanakya Puri, Crime Branch Office, Delhi. Both of them were found present at this office. They asked Police Official as to why they are being retained but police official did not state anything later on they came to know that both of them have been falsely implicated in some fake currency note case.
This defence witness has been crossexamined by ld. APP. During the crossexamination it has come on record that he does not remember the no. of TATA Sumo Vehicle but it was of white colour. 2025 persons had collected at that time when police official came there and had taken both the accused persons from there in their Vehicle. It has also come on record that he or any other person out of those 2025 persons or any member from the accused persons did not make any call to the local police to the effect that 45 persons had come in civil cloth in TATA Sumo or that they were taking both the accused alongwith them forcibly.
44He appeared before the Hon'ble Court as he was asked by Asgar Ahmad and Wakil Ahmad. He did not make any complaint/report to the higher police official at Mujafarnagar Delhi to the fact that local police official did not lodged their complaint. He also did not make any complaint at 100 no. or before any authority at Delhi to the fact that Asgar and Wakil have been illegally detained at Crime Branch Office, Chankayapuri Delhi.
Family member of accused persons also did not make any complaint/report before any authority at Delhi regarding the same.
42.DW2 Sehnaj W/o Sh. Mobin came before the court and deposed that on 25.5.2007 at about 10 am, she came at the house of Meena to collect some goods. She was talking with Meena when three persons came at the house of Meena. They disclosed that they belonged to Crime Branch Chankyapuri. They start talking to Meena and directed Meena to accompanied them at Crime Branch Office for the purpose of inquiry.
Then they took Meena at the office of Crime Branch Chankyapuri. She remained at the house of Meena for one hour then her husband came at the house, she disclosed all the facts to him. After one and half hour, she 45 alongwith her husband and two other persons left for the office of Crime Branch Chankyapuri and they reached at the office and found Meena sitting there. They made request to release her but they disclosed that they would release her tomorrow. Then they returned back at their house and Meena remained there. On the next day they again visited the office of Crime Branch Chankyapuri and Crime Branch official disclosed that they arrested her in a case and refused to release her.
This defence witness deposed that accused Meena is falsely implicated by the Crime Branch Official of Chankyapuri after lifting her from her house on 25.5.2007. She is innocent. This witness has been cross examined by ld. APP. In the crossexamination it has come on record that She did not make any call from her mobile to the effect that police officials of Crime Branch forcibly had taken Meera. She did not ask any resident of the locality to make a call to this effect. Husband of Meena also did not make any call at 100 number after she stated to him that Meena had been taken by the Crime Branch Officials. Name of husband of Meena is Babu Bhai. Babu Bhai is her Jija in relation.
4643.Thereafter, case was fixed for final arguments. Final arguments were heard at length. During the course of arguments ld. counsel for accused persons argued and submitted that it is admitted case of the prosecution that the prosecution not placed any evidence on record which shows that both the teams reached at the spot and proceedings were conducted there because IO not placed on record the log book of both the Govt.
vehicles. Even, their drivers are not made witness in this case. So there is no evidence on records which sows that two team reached at the spot as alleged by the prosecution story. it is also admitted by the witnesses when the parking slip was not taken on record and the persons who was on duty at Ahmerti Gate Parking was not made witneses to prove that both the vehicles are parked at Ajmeri Gate parking. One witness stated that both the vehicles were parked Ahmeri Gate parking and other witness stated that the vehicles were parked at Metro Station and no receipt of parking was placed on record in this regard which falsify the prosecution story. Ld. counsel further argued and submitted that it is pertinent to mention here that no local police was informed by the crime branch officers despite that police station is situated at the distance only 47 one KM and no information was given to chowki Ajmeri Gate, which is near to the spot. Which shows that no raid was conducted there and entire proceedings were conducted by the IO while sitting his crime branch office. Investigation in this case is biased and tainted and no evidence was collected by the crime branch which sows that any proceedings were conducted at the spot and benefit of that goes to the accused and they are entitled for acquittal.
44.Ld. counsel for accused persons further argued and submitted that during the cross examination, PW1, inspector Akshay Kumar admitted that no date, month, year and designation were put by him upon five genuine currency notes of Rs.1,000/ denomination each which was alleged to be given by PW1, to PW3, to do the deal with the accused persons. It is also admitted by PW1 that he had not obtained any permission from his senior officers in respect of using above said genuine notes from his personal account. It is also admitted by PW1 that he did not obtain the signature of any raiding party member and no finger print expert was called at the spot to develop the finger prints/ chance 48 print of the accused Asgar Ahmed from above said five genuine notes even the notes have not been numbered by the PW1 and he failed to told the series of the notes of aforesaid 5 genuine notes. It is also admitted by PW1 that he had not mentioned in any DD entry about using five genuine notes, which creates serious doubts in the prosecution story as no deal was conducted there. It is also admitted by PW1 that no police officials of P. P. Ajmeri Gate or PS NDLS were called at the time of handing over five genuine notes to HC Vijender which shows that no genuine notes of Rs.1,000/ denomination were handed over to HC PW1 failed to disclose the colour of accused Asgar Ahmed, or Wakil Ahmed and he admitted that passenger were present near the spot and also admitted that many vehicles and persons were coming and going inside the park. During the investigation it is admitted by PW1 that the accused persons are not involved in any other criminal case, so the secret information about the accused were false.
45.Again it is argued and submitted that the conduct of the PW1 is totally unbelievable when he allegedly taken into possession the counterfeit 49 currency notes from the accused why, he is not taken into possession the other articles which are in possession of the accused persons, which were later on taken into possession by PW16, SI, Devender Kumar, after period of 4.30/5 hrs i.e. after 06.30/07.00 pm which creates serious doubts in the prosecution story. Even, the PW1 not seized the railway ticket from the accused persons. It is pertinent to mention here that the name of any accused persons is not mentioned in railway ticket which was later on seized by PW16, so there is no proof that the accused persons came from Mumbai through Frozpur Janta express.
46.Ld. counsel further argued and submitted that it admitted by PW1 that the train booking was made by the name of passenger and it is further admitted that the railway ticket seized by the accused does not mentioned the name of the accused so there is no proof that the accused persons came from Firozpur Janta express, as alleged by the prosecution. So when the accused persons not visited there from that train so question of recovery of counterfeit currency notes from the accused does not arise. It is also admitted by PW1 that ACP or any 50 senior officials did not issue in writing to H. C. Vijender to become a decoy customer. It is further admitted by PW1 that he did not inform to any senior officer that he was given Rs. 5,000/ to HC Vijender in respect of present case nor he took any permission from them. It is also admitted by PW1 that he did not mention batch no. and did not affix his official stamp or did not put chemical on the genuine currency notes and he further admitted that he was standing at a distance of about 2025 meter from HC Vijender and he failed to disclose that whether it was left or right hand used by HC Vijender for giving money to accused Asgar Ahmed as HC Vijender has his side towards him. It is pertinent to mention here that as per prosecution case seizure memos of alleged recovered currency notes and list of face currency notes were prepared but it is totally surprising that signature of the accused persons were not obtained on that seizure memos. It means no recovery of alleged currency notes was effected from the possession of the accused persons. It is also admitted by PW3 during cross examination that no public person joined at the time of his own personal search. It is pertinent to mention here that no identification mark was put on the 51 alleged recovered currency notes and no efforts were made to finger prints from alleged counterfeit currency notes. So there is no evidence on record that any deal was done there and any recovery was effected there. This witness further admitted that many passenger collected at the spot, many public persons going on the spot, and no public witnesses joined investigation in this case. PW3 improved his statement that "
kitna Maal Chahiye", same was confronted from his earlier statement so this fact has no value in the eyes of law, which shows that this witness is not trustworthy who is improving and changing his statement.
47.It is further admitted by the PW3 hat he can not tell the identification mark of the Meena Begum and from where these begs were purchased by the accused persons and he failed to told the pockets of bag of Meena Begum. PW3 also admitted that no money was handed over by Asgar Ahmed to him after taking out from his beg. It is admitted case of the prosecution that there is no specific identification mark was put by the IO on any case property, i.e. on bags and on alleged recovered currency notes. It is also admitted fact that such types of bags and currency is 52 easily available in the market and same is very easy to plant upon the accused, so there is no cogent evidence in this regard and benefit of that goes to the accused.
48.Ld. counsel again argued and submitted that PW3 categorically admitted that the disclosure statement of the accused persons was not recorded in his presence. It means, disclosure statement of the accused persons were no recorded till 09.30 pm, however, PW16 SI Devender stated that he reached at the spot at 06.30/7 pm, arrested the accused persons and taken their personal search and recorded their disclosure statement, so there is material contradiction in statement of PW1, PW3, PW15 and PW16 benefit of all these discrepancies goes to the accused which shows that the prosecution is false one and the accused persons are falsely implicated in this case and investigation in this case is biased and tainted. He further admitted that no permission was sought by the PW1 to handover the Rs.5,000/ to PW3 HC Vijender in his presence. he further admitted that IO not obtained his signature on 5 notes of Rs.
1,0000/ denomination. It is surprising when this witness remained in 53 entire investigation as per prosecution case, why PW1 did not obtain his signature on the genuine notes which creates serious doubts in the prosecution story. This witness also admitted that PW1 not put date, month, year, designation and official stamp on the genuine notes.
49.Ld. counsel for accused persons further submitted that PW16 SI Devnder Kumar stated in the examination in chief that he reached at the spot, after receiving DD Entry no. 14 at 06.15 pm, and thereafter he reached at the spot and arrested the accused persons and took their personal search and prepared the arrest memos Ex. PW13/A to Ex.
PW13/C and personal search memos Ex. PW13/D to PW13/F. However, PW1 inspector Akshay Kumar stated that he already arrested the accused persons at about 02.15 to 02.30 pm and PW15 also admitted that PW1 already arrested the accused persons to 02.15 to 02.30 pm. When the accused persons have already been arrested, how PW16 again arrested them. One thing is clear that either PW1 Inspector Akshay Kumar and PW15 HC Parmod Kumar telling lie about the arrest of the accused persons. So the arrest of the accused persons is not 54 clear which is fatal to the prosecution case and they are entitled for acquittal as falsely implicated.
50.Again ld. counsel for accused persons argued and submitted that PW14 Ct. Sanjay Kumar admitted in the cross examination that no public person joined in the investigation in the market, when they reached at shop no. 581, Lajpat Rai Market, despite of availability of public person and he further admitted that the statement of shopkeeper was not recorded by the IO. PW5 Sayed Tuahamer S/o Sh. Sayed Khizer Meer stated in the court that the accused persons purchased the Air Ticket from his office. However, the parentage of the accused Asgar Ahmed and Meena begum not mentioned in the ticket, without they any other person can be possible to purchase tickets of same name and third person name is given Sameer. However, there is no accused in the name of Sameer in the prosecution, so the story put forth by the prosecution that the three accused persons namely Asgar Ahmed, Meena Begum and Wakil Ahmed left Delhi to Mumbai through Flight is not proved by the prosecution and there is serious doubt in this regard.
55There is no explanation given by the prosecution who is this "Sameer" till date. In support of his contentions ld. counsel for accused persons relied upon the following citations :
1. Reman @ Raman &Anr. Vs State of Chhattisgarh, 2009 (1) Chhattisgarh High Court 385 wherein it has been held that : "22. 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 489 (c) 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 (supra) 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. "
2. In Shakil Ahmed Shaikh Vs State of Maharashtra, 2005(2) Crl. Court Cases 580, Bombay High Court it has been observed that : "10. So far as the other evidence adduced by the prosecution is concerned, no independent witness has been examined by the prosecution except one panch who turned hostile regarding the panchnama of seizure of currency notes from the accused. All the other four witnesses are either police constables or Investigating Officer. PW No. 1 Baban Kashinath Nikam has stated that while he was serving as a constable in the local Crime Branch, Thane Rural on 6th April, 2000, they received information that one person was going to come with forged notes at the super market, Mira Road. That the description of the accused was also given to them. Therefore, he along with Sub Inspector Vilas Patil, four constables and panch witnesses went to the said place in a private vehicle and kept a watch on the said person. After about half an hour, the person of the said description appeared there and he was apprehended by Sub 56 Inspector Vilas Patil and three currency notes of 500 denomination was found on his person and accordingly, a complaint was made by him which is at Exhibit13. It is difficult to accept the said evidence as it is firstly not corroborated by any independent witness. PW No. 1 has not stated what was the description of the accused which was given to them. He has further not stated as to whether these counterfeit notes were found on the person of the accused. The panch witness who has been examined has turned hostile. PW No. 4 Kesari Jagannath Shetty has stated that he signed the panchnama in the police station. The prosecution has thereafter examined PW No. 2 Yunus Khan who is also a police constable attached to local Crime Branch. He has also stated that information was received by the Local Crime Branch that one person was carrying counterfeit currency, was going to come near the super market, Mira Road. Therefore, he along with four constables went there and apprehended a person who told them that his name was Shakeel. He has stated that the panchas were asked to take personal search of the accused and forged currency notes numbering 300 were found in a plastic bag. The prosecution has examined PW No. 3 Vilas Sitaram Patil who has also stated that they apprehended the appellant on the basis of information which was received by them.
11. Even if the evidence of this witnesses is taken as it is and it is held that the possession of the currency notes has been proved, even then the prosecution has not adduced any evidence to show that the accused had knowledge that the said notes were not genuine notes or that the said notes were intended to be used as genuine. In order to prove the commission of the said offence under 489C, both these ingredients have to be proved by the prosecution. In my view, the prosecution has thus miserably failed in proving both these ingredients. PW No. 5 Balasaheb Koli has stated that on 11th May, 2000, he dispatched the bundle of 700 currency notes of Rs. 500 denomination to the mint by letter Exhibit22 and that the notes were sent in a sealed packet and acknowledgment was received. As stated hereinabove on the perusal of Exhibit22, it was clear that it is merely a letter sent by the Officers of the Mint informing the Investigating Officer that the opinion would be sent after two months. Nothing else is brought on record.
12. In my view, there is serious lapse in the manner in which the investigation has been done and the manner in which the prosecution has adduced evidence in the trial Court. Similarly, 57 the Ad hoc Sessions Judge has not taken proper care to Exhibit the document without verifying whether it is the same document which has been exhibited. It was the duty of the trial Court also to ensure that the proper documents are taken on record. The judgment of the trial Court also to say the least does not take into consideration the requirement of the legal ingredients which are required for coming to the conclusion that the offence which is alleged has been proved beyond reasonable doubt. The trial Court appears to have convicted the accused merely on suspicion and not on the basis of legal proof. It is a settled maxim in criminal law that suspicion cannot take a place of legal proof and cannot form the basis of any conviction. The offence no matter how heinous or serious it may be, it is a duty of the Court to appreciate the evidence according to law and not be swayed by the seriousness of the offence. The trial Court in paragraph No. 13 of this judgment has observed as under: "Offences of this nature deserve to be curbed with a heavy hand since they not only jeopardize the social discipline and individual security but also substantially contribute in shattering the National Economy. The grip of law on such offences must not be loosened for the minor lapses and technical errors in carrying out the investigation. Of late indifference and non cooperation of individuals in the society is a growing menace which erronically enough is placing such persons in the category of slaves of the criminals and their agents unfortunately infesting even the corridors of the court. However, sticking to the current standard of proof endorsed by the Supreme Court. I have no hesitation in pronouncing the verdict in the following terms regretfully leaning towards the leniency in the matter of prescribing the punishment."
13. In my view, the trial Court has clearly misdirected itself and is swayed by the seriousness of the offence and has convicted the accused on the basis of suspicion. The accused is in jail since last two years. In my view, the prosecution has miserably failed in establishing the said offence beyond reasonable doubt against the appellant accused. The finding of the trial Court also to say the least is incorrect. The judgment and order of the trial Court therefore, will have to be set aside. The conviction of the accused is therefore, set aside and he is acquitted of the offence with which he is charged."
3. State by Lashkar Police Station, Mysore Vs M.V. Srinivasa, Karnataka High Court 2003 , it has 58 been observed that :
5. What transpires thereafter is unfortunately the most disastrous aspect of the prosecution case. Firstly, it does appear from the record that the I.O. did send the notes for expert opinion but this opinion which is Ex. P. 5 was tendered through the I.O. In our considered view, particularly in a case like this where knowledge is of paramount legal consequence it was absolutely unpardonable on the part of the prosecution not to have summoned the expert to give evidence. The first reason for this is because in the present case it would be too hazardous to base a conviction on Ex. P. 5 without this having been substantiated by the expert. The more important reason for it is because if that report Ex. P. 5 which is a highly incriminating document is to be used as the main foundation for a conviction against the accused, then the prosecution was dulybound to have summoned the author of this document so that the accused could have had a fair opportunity of testing its veracity. While it is not open to us to assail the correctness of Ex. P. 5 what we need to point out is that we cannot at the same time accord this document the weight of evidentiary value that would clearly attach to it for the reasons that have already been incorporated by us. This factor goes heavily against the prosecution.
6. What is virtually fatal to the prosecution is the fact that the I.O. has admitted in crossexamination that despite the accused having been remanded to the police custody and despite his having had an opportunity to do a detailed and indepth investigation, that nothing further has emerged. It was very necessary for the prosecution to have investigated into the source or origin of the fake notes for two reasons, Firstly, if the investigation indicated that the accused had obtained the fake currency notes from some other party who was either producing them or dealing in them then the guilty knowledge would have been established. In the absence of that, it is customary for the accused to turnround and state that the notes were received in the normal course of circulation and that the accused did not know that some of the notes were fake and that he had tendered the same in good faith and when such a plea is taken up, having regard to the fact that there is a presumption of innocence in favour of the accused it is the duty of the prosecution to establish the guilty knowledge. We need to go a stage further and point out that since there is every possibility of an innocent party coming into possession of fake currency if it is in 59 circulation, the law has embodied or incorporated the safety provision in Sections 489B and 489C to the effect that the prosecution has to establish that the accused knew or had reason to believe that the currency was fake and that it is for this reason that the investigating authority ought to have done a further indepth investigation with regard to the source. Not having done this, the police have virtually provided the accused with an escape route which he has very happily used in the present trial.
8. The learned Counsel has vehemently submitted that from the facts and circumstances of this case this Court is fully justified in recording a presumption that the accused knew that the 22 hundred rupee notes were fake, his submission being that they were found in a relatively large number and consequently what the learned Counsel submits is that it was for the accused to have tendered a sufficiently acceptable explanation and in the absence thereof, that an adverse inference ought to have been drawn. Unfortunately, this is not the scheme of the law because Sections 489B and 489C for the reasons indicated by us earlier, clearly prescribe that as far as these cases are concerned that the onus is on the prosecution and that therefore, the submission in question cannot be upheld. We do share the view as put forward by the learned Counsel that these are serious offences, that they are economic offences, that the consequences are not only grave but are disastrous and that when detected they must be rigorously punished. All that we can say is that the duty of carrying out the pretrial investigation is invested with the police and it is for the police to act more responsibly and more professionally and it is for the police to ensure that the investigation is properly conducted, that requisite evidence is produced before the Court and it is only in those circumstances that a conviction can be recorded. Where the prosecution case suffers from major infirmities of the type that have been listed by us in this judgment, a conviction in law becomes not only incorrect but it would be impossible. It is in this background and virtually with a degree of regret that we need to record that the order of acquittal will have to be confirmed virtually be default."
4. Saiyyad Iftikhar Hussain Vs State of Punjab, Punjab & Haryana High Court 2001, in this case it has been observed that : 60 "Recovery of counterfeit currency note of Rs.500/ from accused No evidence to show that accused knew or had reason to believe that the note in his possession was forged or counterfeit and also intended to use the same as genuine. Convict was set aside"
5. Abdul Majeed Abdul Reheman Sarkhot Vs State of Maharashtra, Bombay High Court 1999 it has been observed that : "Knowledge of currency note being counterfeit is necessary. Mere possession of counterfeit note has no presumption of the knowledge of the note being counterfeit. Petitioner who happened to come into possession casually cannot be prosecuted unless there are materials that he was using the note knowing that it is counterfeit."
6. S. Chandran Vs State, Madras High Court 1999, in this case it has been observed that : "Mere possession of counterfeit notes is not an offence. There should be sufficient knowledge to the accused and he should have intention to use the same."
"The Inspection of Police who recovered the notes and arrested the accused himself conducted the investigation. Accused acquitted inter alia on this ground. Police officer who had registered the case should not normally investigate the case and it should be investigated by some other officer for a fair and impartial investigation."
7. Uma Shanker Vs State of Chhattisgarh, 2001 (2) JCC (SC) 215 in this case it has been observed that : "mens rea is an essential ingredient of offences u/s 489 B and 489 C of IPC and no material is brought on record by the prosecution to show that the appellant had the requisite mens rea. Presumption of mens rea drawn by the trial court is not warranted under section 4 of the Evidence Act."
618. Mohd. Yasin Vs State of U.P. 1997 Crl. L.J. 3188 , in this case it has been observed that : "6. From the evidence of Jagdish Kumar Agarwal, P.W. 3, and Dr. Virendra kumar P.W. 2, it appears that they suspected about the genuineness of the said note after inspecting it and in order to get confirmation they consulted with P.W. 4. In both sections, namely, Sections 489B and 489C, I.P.C. words "knowing or having reason to believe the same to be forged or counterfeit note" have been commonly used. Referring that portion the learned counsel has submitted that in Hamid Ali's case (supra) it was held that in case of suspicion whether notes were genuine will not amount to "reasonable" cause to believe. In another decision reported in 1980 SCC (Cri) 17 : (AIR 1979 SC 1705) (M. Mammutti v. State of Karnataka), it was held that presumption of knowledge from mere possession can only be drawn if the notes were apparently counterfeit. In the instant case it was not so. After receiving the counterfeit note P.W. 3 had suspicion. He went to P.W. 2 for confirmation and to get further confirmation they visited the shop of P.W. 4. From these facts it is apparent that the counterfeiting exercise was so skilful that P.W. 3 could not be sure of it and had to run to two persons to get confirmation.
13. The learned Judge has considered the circumstances about the arrest of the accused from the spot but has stated that the mere fact that the accused did not run away does not mean that he had no knowledge. It might be that large number of crowd assembled there and he could not get any opportunity to escape. The latter part of his finding is against the weight of evidence on record. The evidence is that the crowd assembled after P.W. 3 visited the shop of P.W. 4. It was done after he consulted his brother P.W. 2 at his chamber. So it is not correct to say that the accused had no chance to escape. Moreover, he did not run away is certainly an important feature that should have been considered while judging whether the accused had knowledge about the counterfeit note. 1 do find that the learned Judge was unable to appreciate the said circumstance properly.
15. Considering the above circumstances I find that the essential ingredient of Sections 489B and 489C since missing it cannot be held to be sufficient to prove the charge."
9. T J Mohan Vs State IX 1995 (3) Madras High 62 Court, in this case it has been observed that : "Recovery of two counterfeit notes. No evidence to prove knowledge of petitioner as to the nature of those notes or that he intended to use the same as genuine. Mens rea can not be presumed merely from the fact that only counterfeit notes were in possession of the petitioner."
10.Gurnam Singh Vs State (Union Territory of Chandigarh) - V1992 (2) Crimes, in this case it has been observed that: "None of ingredients of offences established. Presumption cannot be drawn. Incriminating question not put to appellant. Whether impugned judgment liable to be set aside" (Yes)."
11.Madan Lal Sarma Vs State, 1990 Crl. L.J. 215, Calcutta High Court , in this case it has been observed that :
5. Under Section 489B, I.P.C. the burden is on the prosecution to prove that at the (SIC) when the accused was passing the note he knew that it was a forged one. The mere possession of it by him does not shift the burden to the accused to prove his innocent possession of the forged note. Similarly, under Section 489C, it is to be proved that the accused intended to use the forged or counterfeit currency note as genuine or it might be used as genuine. It is for the prosecution to prove the circumstances which would irresistibly lead to the conclusion that the accused had the intention to introduce surreptitiously the note on the public. Thus knowledge or reason to believe that the note was forged has to be proved to fix the liability under Sections 489B and 489C.
10. Unless it is found that the accused had the knowledge or reason to believe that the said questioned note was a forged one, the question of his palming it off as genuine could not arise.
12.State (Delhi Administration) Vs Pawan Kumar Garg, Delhi High Court 1985 in this case it has been observed that : 63 "(6) Almost to the similar effect are the observations made in Vijay Kumar v. Stale (1975 Rajdhani Law Reporter page 223) by R.N. Aggarwal J. while dealing with a case under Section 489C. He made the following observations:
"The real point that requires determination is whether the accused had the knowledge or reason to believe that the currency notes in question were forged. The finding on this essential condition, to my mind, will determine the finding on the third condition as well for if it is found that the accused knew or had reason to believe the currency notes to be forged there will be little doubt that the intention was to use them as genuine notes." Further observation while dealing with Section 114 of the Evidence Act by R.N. Aggarwal J. is as under :
"The words "may presume" in Section 114 leave it to the Court to make or not to make the presumption according to the circumstances of the case." We may reproduce Section 489C which reads as under : "489C. Whoever has in his possession any forged or counterfeit currencynote or banknote, 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, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extent to seven years, or with fine, or with both."
A plain reading of this section clearly goes to show that the prosecution in order to establish the guilt of the accused has to prove (1) that the accused was in possession of forged or counterfeit currency notes, (2) that the accused knew or had reason to believe the same to be counterfeit or forged, and (3) that the accused intended to use the same as genuine or that it may be used as genuine.
(8) Moreover, we may observe that Section 106 is an exception to the general rule laid in Section 101 of the Evidence Act that the burden of proof basically lies on the prosecution. Section 106 of Evidence Act surely is not intended to relieve the prosecution of that duty. This provision is designed to meet certain exceptional situations in which it would be impossible or disproportionately difficult for the prosecution to establish facts which are specially in the knowledge of the accused and which he can prove without difficulty or inconvenience. The word 'specially' used in the section clearly hints to the facts that are preeminently or exceptionally within his knowledge and no other interpretation can be put on the section or else it will lead to 64 startling conclusions. To us it appears that if the relevant or material information in a particular case is found to be within the special knowledge of the accused then alone the provision of Section 106 are attracted and if the fact is such as is capable of being known by others also and is capable of discovery by diligent and proper investigation, though it might be difficult to do so, then in such an event the prosecution is not relieved of establishing the ingredients of an offence alleged."
On the strength of aforesaid citations ld. counsel for accused persons submitted that accused persons be acquitted by giving them benefit of doubt.
51.Contrary to it, ld. APP opposed the contentions of ld. counsel for accused persons and submitted that accused persons were apprehended at the spot with red handed with huge amount of fake currency notes. Ld. APP further argued and submitted that all the material witnesses have correctly identified the accused persons and relevant case property. Ld. APP again argued and submitted that these accused persons are dangerous for our country since they are dealing with Pakistan for spreading the fake currency notes in the India.
Ld. APP further submitted that accused persons have failed to give any explanation with regard to recovery of such huge fake currency notes 65 from their possession. Ld. APP further argued and submitted that citations relied upon by the ld. counsel for the accused persons are not applicable in this case, since facts of the present case are entirely different from the cited cases. On these grounds ld. APP submitted that accused persons be convicted.
52.Before reaching at any conclusion let the relevant sections 489B; 489C and 34 I.P.C. be reproduced verbatim which are as under: [489B. Using as genuine, forged or counterfeit currency notes or banknotes.Whoever sells to, or buys or receives from, any other person, or otherwise traffics in or uses as genuine, any forged or counterfeit currencynote or banknote, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be forged or counterfeit, shall be punished with [imprisonment for life], or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.] [489C. Possession of forged or counterfeit currencynotes or banknotes.Whoever has in his possession any forged or counterfeit currencynote or banknote, 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, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both.] Sec.34 IPC: "When a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of the common intention of all, each of such persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by him alone."
Careful perusal of the section 34 IPC reveals the following important ingredients : 66 That there must be a criminal act; and The act must have been done by several persons in furtherance of their common intention.
53.Perusal of the case file and having heard the arguments of ld. counsel for accused persons and also after going through the citations relied upon by the ld. counsel for the accused persons, I have come to the conclusion that prosecution has attempted to prove the case for the offence punishable u/s 489B, 489C/ 34 IPC. In this regard, Section 489B refers to selling, buying or otherwise traffics in or uses as genuine forged or counterfeit currency notes and Section 489C refers to the possession of forged or counterfeit currency notes intended for its use as genuine. So, long as section 34 IPC is concerned, it refers to the common intention for committal of offence in furtherance of common intention. Having aforesaid background of the case discussed above in the case in hand my findings are as follows:
1. That on 26.05.2007 accused persons 1)Asgar Ahmad, 2)Wakil Ahmad and 3)Meena Begum were detained at New Delhi Railway Station on the secret information vide deposition of PW1 Insp. Akshay Kumar and other raiding party members namely PW7 Ct. Surender, PW13 HC Ravinder, PW15 HC Pramod and PW16 SI Devender;
2. Having detained them following counterfeit currency notes were recovered: Rs.2,95,000/ from accused Asgar Ahamd vide seizure memo Ex.PW1/G;
67Rs.2,35,000/ from accused Meena Begum vide seizure memo Ex.PW1/J; and Rs.10,000/ from accused Mustkin on 31.05.2007 when he was arrested at the instance of other coaccused persons vide seizure memo Ex.PW7D. In this regard vide depositions of vide deposition of PW1 Insp. Akshay Kumar and other raiding party members namely PW7 Ct.
Surender, PW13 HC Ravinder, PW15 HC Pramod and PW16 SI Devender.
3. The confidential Expert report from Currency Note Press, Nasik Road, Maharashtra State , regarding recovered fake currency notes from accused persons, was produced on record u/s 292/293 Chapter XXIII Cr. P.C. 1973 as per Chapter V of Indian Evidence Act on 17.09.2010 which has been marked as Ex.C1 vide court order sheet dated 17.09.2010. This report clearly opines that recovered notes counterfeit currency notes from accused persons are .
4. The arrest of accused persons Asgar Ahmad, Wakil Ahmad, Meena Begum and Mustakin has been proved as per depositions of PW1, PW7, PW13 and PW16 and other raiding party members vide arrest memo of Asgar Ahmed Ex.PW13/A, Wakil Ahmed as Ex.PW13/B; Begum as Ex.PW13/C and arrest memo of accused Mustakin Ex.PW7/A respectively.
5. Twenty forged / counterfeit currency notes in the denomination of Rs. 500/ each were given by accused Meena Begum at the instance of accused Asgar Ahmad on 26.05.2007 while PW3 HC Vijender (decoy customer) made deal with them on the direction of PW1 Insp. Akshay Kumar vide deposition of PW3 HC Vijender.
54.Now, so long as section 34 IPC is concerned, in this regard the common intention can be inferred from attending circumstances of the case in furtherance of their common intention. The accused persons were arrested by the police officials at New Delhi Railway Station on 26.05.2007 and HC Vijender was directed to become decoy customer.
PW1 Insp. Akshay Kumar took out five currency notes of Rs.1000/ 68 denomination and signed them and handed over to decoy customer HC Vijender to perform the deal with accused persons for purchasing fake Indian Currency notes in lieu of said genuine notes. HC Vijender was also instructed to make gesture by raising his both hands after striking the deal. In this regard prosecution has also tried to prove beyond reasonable doubt that accused persons have a plan in their mind to use the fake currency notes after arranging the same from Pakistan as per the deposition of PW1 Insp. Akshay Kumar, PW3 HC Vijender, PW13 HC Ravinder, PW14 Ct. Sanjay Kumar, PW15 HC Pramod and PW16 SI Devender. The documents to this effect are Ex.PW9/B. It is interesting to note that when record was examined in the deposition of PW5 Sayed Tuahamer it has come on record that the accused persons purchased the Air Ticket from his office. However, the parentage of accused Asgar Ahmed and Meena begum is not mentioned in the ticket, without these description any other person can be possible to purchase the said tickets of same name and third person name is given as Sameer in stead of accused Wakil Ahmad. However, there is no accused in the name of Sameer in the prosecution, so the story put forth by the 69 prosecution that the three accused persons namely Asgar Ahmed, Meena Begum and Wakil Ahmed left Delhi to Mumbai through Flight, which crack down the theory of visit by all the three accused persons from Delhi to Mumbai.
55. It is further interesting to note that the mobile number of all the three accused persons have been shown having talks as per depositions of PW1 Insp. Akashay Kumar and PW8 Ct. Bhagwan Sahay Meena but nowhere it has come on record that the talks were with regard to arrangement of fake currency money for the intended use in the market.
However, to trace the intention to visit from Delhi to Mumbai and returned back, I may rely upon the circumstantial evidence in absence of direct evidence to trace the intention, plan and to attain the objectives in the minds of the accused persons. In this regard the Apex Court in number of cases has laid down the following bottom line principles to bring the case for the purpose of conviction. In this regard the principles of circumstantial evidence have been well illustrated by Hon'ble Supreme 70 Court in 'Padala Veera Reddy Vs State of A. P. and Ors.' that when a case rests upon circumstantial evidence, such evidence must satisfy the following tests : the circumstances from which an inference of guilt is sought to be drawn, must be cogently and firmly established;
those circumstances should be of a definite tendency unerringly pointing towards guilt of the accused;
the circumstances, taken cumulatively should form a chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probability the crime was committed by the accused and none else; and the circumstantial evidence in order to sustain conviction must be complete and incapable of explanation of any other hypothesis than that of the guilt of the accused and such evidence should not only be consistent with the guilt of the accused but should be inconsistent with his innocence."
Time and again Hon'ble Apex Court reiterated the principles and explaining the magnitude of conviction on the basis of circumstantial evidence through catena of judgments reduced the above principles into the following three principles i.e. in case titled as 'Chandmal V State of Rasjasthan AIR 1976 SC 917':
i) The circumstances from which evidence is drawn must be cogently and firmly established;
ii) Those circumstances should be of a definite tendency unerringly pointing towards the guilt of the accused; and
iii) The circumstances taken cumulatively should form a 71 chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that with all human probability the crime was committed by the accused and none else.
56.Careful perusal of these principles reveal that name of Sameer in the deposition of PW5 Sayed Tuahameer - Owner of Bukhari Tour & Travels Pvt. Ltd. was not found mentioned in the list of accused persons so it creates hole in the whole theory that accused persons intended to collect the fake currency note went to Pakistan in furtherance of their common intention.
57.So long as the recovery of counterfeit currency notes from accused persons, is concerned, in this regard prosecution has successfully proved its case beyond reasonable doubt u/s 489C read with 34 IPC since it has clearly come on record that on 26.05.2007 accused persons namely Asgar Ahmad and Meena Begum were detained at New Delhi Railway Station on the secret information vide deposition of PW1 Insp.
Akshay Kumar and other raiding party members namely PW7 Ct.
Surender, PW13 HC Ravinder, PW15 HC Pramod and PW16 SI Devender and fake currency notes totaling Rs.2,95,000/ in the 72 denomination of Rs.500 each were recovered from accused Asgar Ahamd vide seizure memo Ex.PW1/G, And fake / counterfeit currency notes in the denomination of Rs.500/ each totaling Rs.2,35,000/ were also recovered from accused Meena Begum vide seizure memo Ex.PW1/J. In this regard PW1 Insp. Akshay Kumar and other raiding party members namely PW7 Ct. Surender, PW13 HC Ravinder, PW15 HC Pramod and PW16 SI Devender have deposed against accused persons and proved all the material facts constituting an offence punishable u/s 489C read with 34 IPC on record. Besides, a Confidential Expert Report from Currency Note Press, Nasik Road, Maharashtra State, with regard to proof that recovered notes were counterfeit currency notes has been produced on record u/s 292/293 Chapter XXIII Cr. P.C. 1973 as per Chapter V of Indian Evidence Act on 17.09.2010 which has been marked as Ex.C1 vide court order sheet dated 17.09.2010. This report clearly opines that recovered notes from counterfeit accused persons are currency notes . The arrest of accused persons Asgar Ahmad and Meena Begum has been proved as per depositions of PW1, PW7, PW13 and PW16 and other raiding party 73 members vide arrest memo of Asgar Ahmed Ex.PW13/A and Meena Begum as Ex.PW13/C. Thus, it has also come on record that both these accused persons were arrested with the fake currency notes which indicates it was possessed by them for intended use. Therefore, no other hypothesis comes on record except that both accused persons namely Meena Begum and Asgar Ahmad have common intention for the committal of offence u/s 489C read with 34 IPC. In view of this I convict accused persons Meena Begum and Asgar Ahmad u/s 489C IPC read with 34 IPC.
58.However, it is a matter of serious consideration that on the demand of decoy customer the exchange of counterfeit money with original money of Rs.5000/ took place. Whether this mode of exchange can be considered to fall within the definition of offence u/s 489B IPC read with 34 IPC. The answer is certainly, 'no' , precisely for the reasons that the money was being exchanged in lieu of original currency notes offered by PW3 Vijender, so, at the most this exchange can be stretched to determine the conduct of the accused persons for the purpose of 74 conviction of the accused persons that the fake/ counterfeit money was kept or possessed by them for the intended use. The recovery of forged money of Rs.10,000/ from accused Mustakin at the disclosure of co accused persons Asgar Ahmad cannot hold him guilty for the offence u/s 489B, 489C read with 34 IPC in absence of other corroborative evidence precisely for the reasons that merely company of Mustakin with coaccused persons also cannot be held him guilty in absence of other cogent corroborative evidence. So long as the telephonic conversation vide Ex.PW16/C between the accused persons, is concerned, in this regard as per the conversation amongst the accused persons it has come on record during the course of trial in the investigation that no person has been made witness where from the call originated or received in view of these facts and circumstance inference based on the conversation conducted amongst the accused persons can not be drawn in absence of destination of its origination and receiving end. However, a note of the same can be taken to lend a belief for the purpose of corroboration of the deposition of other material witnesses.
In view of this I acquit accused persons 1)Meena Begum, 2)Asgar 75 Ahmad and 3)Wakil Ahmad for the offence u/s 489B IPC and I also acquit accused 4)Mustakin for the offences u/s 489B & 489C IPC.
In view of the above discussion and observations, I convict accused persons namely 1)Meena Begum and
2)Asgar Ahmad for the offence u/s 489C read with 34 IPC;
I acquit accused Wakil Ahmad for the offence u/s 489B IPC; and I also acquit accused namely Mustakin for the offence u/s 489B and 489C IPC.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 08.11.2011 (RAJ KAPOOR) ASJ2/ West Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi 76