Jharkhand High Court
Rajeshwar Choudhary @ Ramesh Choudhary vs The State Of Jharkhand on 4 August, 2022
Author: Rongon Mukhopadhyay
Bench: Rongon Mukhopadhyay, Ambuj Nath
1
Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 1189 of 2016
With
Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 993 of 2016
With
Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 1186 of 2016
----
Against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 12.08.2016, (Sentenced passed on 18.08.2016), passed by Shri Lolark Dubey, learned Additional Sessions Judge-IVth, Deoghar in Sessions Case No. 143 of 2010.
-------
Rajeshwar Choudhary @ Ramesh Choudhary. ....Appellant in Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 1189 of 2016
------
Tokha Singh @ Trilok Singh. ....Appellant in
Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 993 of 2016
-----
Khalsa Singh @ Surendra Pal Singh. ......Appellant in
Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 1186 of 2016
Versus
The State of Jharkhand. ....Respondent
-------
Coram: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH
-------
For the Appellant : Mr. Jitendra Tripathy, Advocate in Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 1189 of 2016 : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Advocate in Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 993 of 2016 : Mr. Sudhanshu Kumar Deo, Advocate in Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 1186 of 2016 For the State : Mr. Ravi Prakash, Special P.P
-----
C.A.V. On 13.07.2022 Pronounced on _4/08/2022 Heard Mr. Jitendra Tripathy, learned counsel for the appellant in Cr. Appeal (D.B.). No. 1189 of 2016, Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the appellant in Cr. Appeal (D.B.). No. 993 of 2016, Mr. Sudhanshu Kumar Deo, learned counsel for the appellant in Cr. Appeal (D.B.). No. 1186 of 2016 and Mr. Ravi Prakash, learned Special P.P.
2. All these appeals are directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 12.08.2016, (Sentenced passed on 18.08.2016), passed by Shri Lolark Dubey, learned Additional Sessions Judge-IVth, Deoghar in Sessions Case No. 143 of 2010, whereby and whereunder the appellants have been convicted for the offences punishable under sections 489A/34, 489 B/34, 489C/34, 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for the offences under sections 489A/34 read with section 120B IPC along with a fine of Rs.25,000/-each, imprisonment for life for the offence under section 489B/34 read with section 120B IPC along with a fine of Rs.25,000/- each, rigorous imprisonment for seven years and a fine of 2 Cr. Appeal(D.B.) No.1189 of 2016 With Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No.993 of 2016 With Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 1186 of 2016 Rs.10,000/- each for the offence under section 489C/34 IPC read with section 120B IPC and rigorous imprisonment for seven years along with a fine of Rs.10,000/- each for the offence under section 420 IPC. All the sentences are to run concurrently.
3. The self statement of Sub Inspector of Police-Anant Arya was recorded on 26.3.2010 in the general compartment of Howrah Amritsar Mail (Punjab Mail), in which he has stated that on 25.03.2010 at about 4 P.M., he had received a confidential information that a racket was involved in dealing in counterfeit currency notes and circulating the same in an around Deoghar. The persons involved were planning to transport fake currency notes to Punjab through Howrah Amritsar Mail. A sanha was entered and the information was forwarded to S.P., Rail, who constituted a raiding party. It has been alleged that the raiding party had kept a vigil at Jasidih Railway Station and as soon as Punjab Mail came and stopped at the station, a person with an air bag in a suspicions condition was seen boarding the train. The raiding party also boarded the train and on seeing them, the concerned person tried to flee away with the bag but he was apprehended by the police. The apprehended person disclosed his name as Rajeshwar Choudhary @ Ramesh Choudhary (appellant in Cr. Appeal (D.B.). No.1189 of 2016) and he confessed that he was involved in the illegal business of counterfeit currency notes. He also confessed that he was taking the fake currency notes to Punjab. On a search of the bag, counterfeit notes of Rs.39,00,000/-was seized. A seizure list was also duly prepared. The apprehended accused had disclosed the name of the persons involved in such clandestine business.
4. Based on the aforesaid allegations, Rail Jasidih P.S. Case No. 02 of 2010 was instituted for the offences punishable under sections 489A, 489B, 489C, 420, 120B of the Indian Penal Code against Rajeshwar Choudhary @ Ramesh Choudhary, Chandan Giri, Uncle Jee, Premjeet Mandal, the owner of Jyoti hotel, Khalsa Singh (appellant in Cr. Appeal (D.B.). No. 1186 of 2016) and Tokha Singh (appellant in Cr. Appeal (D.B.). No. 993 of 2016). In course of investigation, chargesheet was submitted against Rajeshwar Choudhary @ Ramesh Choudhary, Khalsa Singh and Tokha Singh while keeping the investigation pending against the others and after cognizance was taken, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions where it was registered as S.T. Case No. 143 of 2010. Charge was framed against the accused persons under sections 489A/34,489B/34, 489C/34, 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, which was 3 Cr. Appeal(D.B.) No.1189 of 2016 With Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No.993 of 2016 With Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 1186 of 2016 read over and explained to the accused in Hindi, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
5. The prosecution in support of its case has examined as many as six witnesses.
P.W-1-Sudhir Prasad has stated that the incident is of 25/26.3.2010 at night. He was posted as officer in charge of Rail P.S., Madhupur and on 25.3.2016 at about 4.30 P.M., information was received from Anant Arya (informant) that he has been selected as a member of the team constituted by Rail S.P., Dhanbad. He reached Jasidih P.S. and the officer in charge disclosed that a confidential report has been received that a gang dealing in counterfeit notes is very active in Deoghar and fake currency notes were to be transported to Punjab through Punjab Mail. He stated that the raiding party reached Jasidih Station and when Punjab Mail approached the station, a person was seen moving around in a suspicious condition with an air bag, who boarded a general compartment of the train. On seeing the members of the raiding party, he wanted to flee but was apprehended along with the bag. On being interrogated, the apprehended person disclosed his name as Rajeshwar Choudhary @ Ramesh Choudhary and on search of the bag, Rs.39,00,000/- lacs cash and a mobile were recovered and seized and a seizure list was also duly prepared. The seizure list is in the handwriting of this witness and signed by him and which has been proved and marked as Ext-1. On being interrogated, Rajeshwar Choudhary @ Ramesh Choudhary had disclosed the name of the persons involved in the racket, which included Chandan Giri, Premjeet Mandal, Uncle Jee, the owner of Jyoti Hotel and Khalsa Singh as well as Tokha Singh from Jalandhar district of Punjab. On 25.03.2010, Khalsa Singh had come to Deoghar along with Rajeshwar Choudhary and the other persons involved had given the cash in room no. 211 of Jyoti hotel. The confessional statement of Rajeshwar Choudhary was recorded. He has deposed that a team had been dispatched by S.P. Rail to arrest Khalsa Singh and Tokha Singh. On 5.4.2010, both were arrested and a mobile was seized from each of them, for which separate seizure lists were prepared, which have been proved and marked as Ext-1/1 and ½. The confessional statement of both the apprehended accused were recorded and both the accused had admitted that the counterfeit currency notes are cleaned by applying chemicals.
In cross-examination, he has stated that all the seven members of the raiding party had boarded the train. The currency notes, which were seized, were 4 Cr. Appeal(D.B.) No.1189 of 2016 With Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No.993 of 2016 With Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 1186 of 2016 blackish in colour. The notes could not be circulated in the market. He has admitted that he is not an expert in examining fake currency notes.
PW-2-Rajniti Pandey was also a member of the raiding party and he has deposed that a person had boarded the general compartment who aroused suspicion and when confronted, the said person tried to jump from the train but he was apprehended. On search of the bag, Rs.39,00,000/- of counterfeit currency notes were recovered. The apprehended accused had disclosed his name as Rajeshwar Choudhary @ Ramesh Choudhary and he had also disclosed the names of his accomplices as Tokha Singh, Khalsa Singh, Chandan Giri, the owner of Jyoti Hotel and Parveen Mandal.
In cross-examination, he has deposed that he is not an expert in detecting fake currency notes. He has further stated that the confessional statement of Rajeshwar Choudhary was recorded by the officer in charge-Anant Arya.
P.W-3-Balsharan Singh was a member of the raiding party, who has stated that from the general compartment of the train, a person having a sky blue bag was trying to flee away but was apprehended and on search, Rs.39,00,000/- of fake currency notes were recovered. A seizure list was also prepared. The apprehended accused had disclosed his name as Rajeshwar Choudhary and those of his accomplices as Chandan Giri, Premjeet Mandal, the owner of Jyoti Hotel, Khalsa Singh and Tokha Singh.
In cross-examination, he has stated that the seizure list was prepared in the train itself in his presence. He has also stated that the place of occurrence is the running train.
P.W-4-Anil Kumar Dubey was also a member of the raiding party who has deposed that a person with a bag was apprehended from the train and from the bag, Rs.39,00,000/- of fake currency notes were recovered. The apprehended person had disclosed his name as Rajeshwar Choudhary @ Ramesh Choudhary and he had also disclosed the name of his accomplices but he is not in a position to state their names.
P.W-5-Satyendra Kumar is a member of the raiding party who had apprehended Rajeshwar Choudhary and a search of his bag yielded, Rs.39,00,000/- of fake currency notes. A seizure list was prepared of the seized currency notes and a Chinese Mobile. Rajeshwar Choudhary @ Ramesh Choudhary had disclosed that two of his accomplices had boarded the sleeper coach of the train.
In cross-examination, he has stated that the currency notes were blackish 5 Cr. Appeal(D.B.) No.1189 of 2016 With Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No.993 of 2016 With Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 1186 of 2016 in colour. There were fourteen bundles of Rs.100/- note and 50 bundles of Rs.500/- notes.
P.W-6-Anant Arya is the informant of the case as well as the Investigating Officer. On 26.03.2010, he was posted at Jasidih Rail P.S. The incident occurred at 8.15 P.M. in the general compartment of Howrah Amritsar Express. He has stated that he had already received a confidential information that fake currency notes were going to be transported to Punjab. He along with the other members of the raiding party had led a siege at Jasidih Railway Station. A person in a suspicious condition had boarded the train and on seeing the police party had tried to jump from the train but was apprehended. On search of his bag, Rs. 39,00,000/- cash which was blackish in colour was recovered. A seizure list was prepared, in which Mahesh Sah and Rajesh Ram had signed as witnesses. The apprehended accused had disclosed his name as Rajeshwar Choudhary @ Ramesh Choudhary. He had also disclosed about the name of his accomplices including Chandan Giri, Tokha Singh, Khalsa Singh and uncle jee and the seized cash was being taken to Tokha Singh and Khalsa Singh. He had recorded his self-statement, which has been proved and marked as Ext-2. He has also proved his signature in the self-statement, which has been marked as Ext-2/1. The mobile phones, which were seized from Rajeshwar Choudhary, Tokha Singh and Khalsa Singh, have been marked as material exhibit Nos. I, II and III. The sky colour bag recovered from Rajeshwar Choudhary @ Ramesh Choudhary has been marked as material Ext-IV. He has proved the confessional statement of Rajeshwar Choudhary @ Ramesh Choudhary, which contains his signature, which has been marked as Ext-V. He has described the place of occurrence, which is a general compartment of Howrah Amritsar Punjab Mail. He had recorded the statements of Anil Dubey, Sudhir Kumar Singh, Satyendra Kumar, Mukesh Sah and Rajesh Ram. He had also recorded the statement of Balsharan Singh and Rajniti Pandey and all have stated that about the incident which had taken place. He had gone with the team to Punjab where Tokha Singh and Khalsa Singh were arrested. The confessional statements of Tokha Singh and Khalsa Singh have been proved and marked as Ext-6 and 7 respectively.
On conclusion of investigation, chargesheet was submitted against Rajeshwar Choudhary @ Ramesh Choudhary, Tokha Singh and Khalsa Singh.
In cross-examination, he has stated that he is the informant as well as the Investigating officer of the case. No incriminating articles were recovered from the possession of Tokha Singh and Khalsa Singh.
6Cr. Appeal(D.B.) No.1189 of 2016 With Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No.993 of 2016 With Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 1186 of 2016 In cross-examination on behalf of Rajeshwar Choudhary @ Ramesh Choudhary, he has deposed that all the notes were blackish in colour. The notes, which were mentioned in the seizure list, did not have any numbers. In course of investigation, none had come forward to say that the accused persons had either tried to sell the counterfeit notes or exchanged them.
6. The statements of the accused persons were recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C., in which they have denied to have been involved in the offence as alleged.
7. Mr. Jitendra Tripathy, learned counsel for the appellant in Cr. Appeal (D.B.). No. 1189 of 2016, has submitted that the prosecution has failed to ascertain that the currency notes which were seized were fake currency notes. He has submitted that as per P.W-6 the notes were blackish in colour without any numbers printed on them and by no stretch of imagination it can be said that they were counterfeit notes. Mr. Tripathy has also submitted that the seized notes were never sent for forensic examination.
8. Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh and Mr. Sudhansu Kumar Deo, learned counsel for the appellants in Cr. Appeal (D.B.). No. 993 of 2016 and in Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 1186 of 2016, have submitted that save and except the confessional statement of Rajeshwar Choudhary @ Ramesh Choudhary, there is no other evidence against the appellants.
9. Mr. Ravi Prakash, learned Special P.P., on the other hand, has submitted that all the appellants are active members of a racket who were indulging in supply, distribution and circulation of fake currency notes. It has been submitted that no leniency be shown to the appellants in view of the recovery of a huge amount of fake currency notes.
10. We have heard the arguments adduced on behalf of both the sides and have also perused the Lower Court Records.
11. The case relates to recovery of Rs.39,00,000/-in cash from the appellant Rajeshwar Choudhary @ Ramesh Choudhary. The appellant Rajeshwar Choudhary @ Ramesh Choudhary had confessed and named his accomplices, which included Tokha Singh and Khalsa Singh. As per P.W-6, the notes, which were seized, were blackish in colour and also did not have numbers printed on them. P.W-1 has stated that Tokha Singh and Khalsa Singh had confessed and had disclosed that the currency notes are cleaned by applying chemicals. Learned counsel for the appellants has stressed much upon the failure of the prosecution to send the seized notes for forensic examination but such failure 7 Cr. Appeal(D.B.) No.1189 of 2016 With Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No.993 of 2016 With Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 1186 of 2016 on the part of the prosecution will not render its case redundant. No doubt, it is true that the facts of the case emphasizes forensic examination but absence of forensic examination cannot dilute the allegations levelled.
12. Infact Section 28 of the Indian Penal Code comes to the rescue of the prosecution. Section 28 of IPC reads as follows:-
28. "Counterfeit". --A person is said to "counterfeit" who causes one thing to resemble another thing, intending by means of that resemblance to practise deception, or knowing it to be likely that deception will thereby be practiced.
[Explanation 1.--It is not essential to counterfeiting that the imitation should be exact.
Explanation 2.--When a person causes one thing to resemble another thing, and the resemblance is such that a person might be deceived thereby, it shall be presumed, until the contrary is proved, that the person so causing the one thing to resemble the other thing intended by means of that resemblance to practise deception or knew it to be likely that deception would thereby be practised.] Explanation-2 casts a duty upon an accused to explain the resemblance of a currency note by rebuttal evidence and if he fails, a presumption shall be drawn about the said accused attempting to cause deception or practice deception.
13. In the present case, the appellant- Rajeshwar Choudhary @ Ramesh Choudhary has failed to disprove the possession of fake currency notes and even in his 313 Cr.P.C statement, no explanation has been given by him with regard to such possession and in absence of any explanation by way of rebuttal, it is presumed that the appellant Rajeshwar Choudhary @ Ramesh Choudhary was involved in dealing with counterfeit currency notes in order to practice deception.
14. In this context, reference may be made to the case of K. Hashim Vs. State of T.N. reported in (2005) 1 SCC 237, wherein it has been held as follows:-
"53. "Counterfeit" in Section 28 does not connote an exact reproduction of the original counterfeited. Explanation 2 of Section 28 is of great significance. It lays down a rebuttable presumption where resemblance is such that a person might be deceived thereby. In such a case the intention or the knowledge is presumed unless the contrary is proved.
15. The learned trial court, therefore, was justified in convicting the accused- Rajeshwar Choudhary @ Ramesh Choudhary for the offences under sections 489A/34, 489B/34, 489C/34, 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him accordingly.
16. We do not find any reason to interfere in the judgement and order of 8 Cr. Appeal(D.B.) No.1189 of 2016 With Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No.993 of 2016 With Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 1186 of 2016 conviction and sentence dated 12.08.2016 (sentence passed on 18.08.2016) and accordingly Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 1189 of 2016 is dismissed.
17. So far as the rest appellants are concerned, there is no evidence worth taking note of which would be suggestive of their involvement in the transportation and circulation of counterfeit notes. Rajeshwar Choudhary @ Ramesh Choudhary had confessed indicting the rest two appellants and on being arrested they too had confessed. Admittedly, there has been no recovery of any incriminating materials on the confession of the said appellants. The learned trial court has treated the case of the appellants-Tokha Singh and Khalsa Singh at par with that of Rajeshwar Choudhary @ Ramesh Choudhary without appreciating the fact that there is no evidence worth consideration to convict the said appellants.
18. Accordingly, in view of what has been discussed above, Cr. Appeal (D.B.). No. 993 of 2016 and Cr. Appeal (D.B.). No. 1186 of 2016 are allowed and the judgerment and order of conviction and sentence dated 12.08.2016, (sentence passed on 18.08.2016), passed by Shri Lolark Dubey, learned Additional Sessions Judge-IVth, Deoghar in Sessions Case No. 143 of 2010, whereby and whereunder the appellants have been convicted for the offences punishable under sections 489A/34, 489 B/34, 489C/34, 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for the offences under sections 489A/34 read with section 120B IPC along with a fine of Rs.25,000/-each, imprisonment for life for the offence under section 489B/34 read with section 120B IPC along with a fine of Rs.25,000/- each, rigorous imprisonment for seven years and a fine of Rs.10,000/- each for the offence under section 489C/34 IPC read with section 120B IPC and rigorous imprisonment for seven years along with a fine of Rs.10,000/- each for the offence under section 420 IPC, is hereby set aside. Since the appellants are on bail, they are discharged from the liability of their bail bonds.
All these appeals stand disposed of.
Pending I.As, if any, also stand disposed of.
(Rongon Mukhopadhyay,J) (Ambuj Nath, J) Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi Dated 4th August, 2022 Rakesh/NAFR