Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
State vs Gurmeet Singh on 12 May, 2017
Author: Vijay Bishnoi
Bench: Vijay Bishnoi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Crml Leave To Appeal No. 60 / 2016
State of Rajasthan
----Appellant
Versus
Gurmeet Singh S/o Shri Sodagar Singh, B/c Majbi Sikh, R/o
Hindumalkot, District Sri Ganganagar.
----Respondent
_____________________________________________________
For Appellant(s) : Mr. O.P. Rathi, Public Prosecutor
Amicus Curiae : Mr. Tarun Dhana, Amicus Curiae
_____________________________________________________
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI
Judgment / Order 12/05/2017 This criminal leave to appeal has been filed by the appellant- State seeking leave to file appeal against the judgment dated 31.07.2015 passed by the Special Court (Fake Currency Cases), Jaipur City, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial court') in Sessions Case No.40/2011, whereby the trial court while convicting and sentencing the accused respondent for the offence punishable under Section 489-C IPC has acquitted him for the offence punishable under Section 489-B IPC.
Learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the appellant-State has argued that the trial court has grossly erred in acquitting the accused respondent for the offence punishable under Section 489-B IPC. It is contended that at the time of arrest of accused respondent from his house, total 456 counterfeit currency notes to the denomination of Rs.500/- each recovered from the accused (2 of 3) [CRLLA-60/2016] respondent and it is clear that he received the same from any other person and, therefore, the charge against him for the offence punishable under Section 489-B IPC was fully proved. Learned Public Prosecutor has, therefore, argued that it is fit case where leave to appeal be granted to the appellant-State to file appeal against the judgment impugned, whereby the trial court has acquitted the accused respondent for the offence punishable under Section 489-B IPC.
Per contra, learned Amicus Curiae has submitted that the prosecution has failed to produce any evidence to prove that the accused respondent was using counterfeit currency notes. It is contended that PW-10 Rahul Yadav, Seizure Officer, in his statement has clearly stated that none of the residents of village have informed him that the accused respondent was using counterfeit currency notes. It is also contended that in the absence of any evidence on record to the effect that the accused respondent made purchase, sale or transact in the counterfeit currency notes, the trial court has rightly acquitted him for the offence punishable under Section 489-B IPC.
Heard learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned Amicus Curiae and carefully scrutinized the record.
The factum of recovery of counterfeit currency notes to the denomination of Rs.500/- each from the possession of the accused respondent is not in dispute.
So far as the fact whether the accused respondent was using counterfeit currency notes as genuine is concerned, the prosecution has failed to produce any evidence to this effect.
(3 of 3) [CRLLA-60/2016] PW-10 Rahul Yada, Seizure Officer, in his cross-examination has specifically stated that during the course of investigation, he did not received any information from anybody that the accused respondent was using the counterfeit currency notes as genuine.
Looking to the above facts and circumstances of the case, I don't find any illegality in the judgment impugned passed by the trial court, whereby it has acquitted the accused respondent for the offence punishable under Section 489-B IPC.
Hence, no case for grant of leave to file appeal against the impugned judgment is made out.
Accordingly, this criminal leave to appeal is dismissed.
(VIJAY BISHNOI)J. Abhishek Kumar S.No.27