Delhi District Court
State vs (1)Mohd. Jafar S/O Mohd. Saleem on 7 June, 2012
IN THE COURT OF SHRI P.S. TEJI : DISTRICT JUDGE &
ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE, I/C (EAST), KARKARDOOMA
COURTS, DELHI.
SC No.41/10/09
Unique Case ID No.02402R0180542009
FIR No.90/2009
Police Station Geeta Colony
Under Section 489B/489C/34 IPC
State Versus (1)Mohd. Jafar S/o Mohd. Saleem
R/o Village Shakhni, PS Jahangirabad,
Distt. Bulandshahar, U.P.
(2)Mohd. Jamal S/o Sh. Ismile
R/o H.No.654, Chota Bazar,
Kashmiri Gate, Delhi.
(3) Qamar Abbas S/o Dabar Hussain
R/o H.No.1043, Kishan Ganj, Azad
Market, Delhi110006.
(discharged vide order dated 13.05.2010)
Date of Institution : 29.07.2009
Date of judgment reserved : 21.05.2012
Date of judgment : 04.06.2012
SC No.41/10/09 State Vs. Mohd. Jafar etc. Page 1 of 24
JUDGMENT
Two accused persons, namely, Mohd. Jafar and Mohd. Jamal have been sent to face trial by the police of Police Station Geeta Colony in FIR No.90/2009 under Section 489B/489C/34 IPC. 2 Facts, in brief, are that on 28.04.2009 HC Rohtash Kumar(PW5), Ct. Harender(PW4) and Ct. Rajender(PW6) were present at Rani Garden, Geeta Colony for patrolling. At about 5.30 p.m. a secret informant met HC Rohtsh(PW5) and informed about presence of two persons having fake currency notes of Rs. 1,000/ denomination and were giving two fake currency notes of Rs. 1,000/ in exchange of genuine currency note of Rs. 1,000/. On receipt of said information, HC Rohtash Kumar(PW5) along with staff and secret informer reached near the park situated near the said place at about 5.40 p.m. 45 passersby were asked to join the raiding party but all of them left the spot by showing their difficulty to join the raiding team without disclosing their names and addresses. Without wasting time, HC Rohtash Kumar(PW5) formed a raiding party. Ct. Rajender(PW6) was made a decoy customer. He was given one note of Rs. 1,000/ bearing No. 4CD 591459 having signatures of HC Rohtash Kumar. He was directed to go towards two persons standing on Pushta Road, SC No.41/10/09 State Vs. Mohd. Jafar etc. Page 2 of 24 Taj Enclave. Ct. Rajender(PW6) was also directed to make a deal of exchanging the said note with two fake currency notes of Rs.1,000/. A handing over memo Ex.PW4/E was prepared in this regard. He was also directed to give the signal by putting his hand on his head after completion of deal. Police party took position near the spot and waited for signal. At about 6.10 p.m., Ct. Rajender(PW6) gave pre appointed signal. On receipt of said signal, both the said persons were apprehended who disclosed their names as accused Mohd. Jafar and Mohd. Jamal. On search of accused Mohd. Jafar, 98 currency notes of Rs.1,000/ each Ex.P1 starting from serial No. 7AF 999401 were recovered whereas from the search of accused Jamal 80 currency notes of Rs 1,000/ each Ex.P2 starting from serial No. 7AF 996001 were recovered from their right side pant pocket. From the shirt pocket of accused Mohd. Jamal, one note of Rs.1,000/ Ex.P5 was also recovered which was given in exchange by Ct. Rajender(PW6). Ct. Rajender(PW6) produced two currency notes bearing No.7AF 996094 and 7AF 996095 Ex.P4 which he exchanged with accused persons while giving them genuine currency note of Rs.1,000/. HC Rohtash Kumar(PW5) tallied the recovered fake currency notes with the SC No.41/10/09 State Vs. Mohd. Jafar etc. Page 3 of 24 genuine note and found it to be fake. Fake currency notes recovered from accused Mohd. Jafar were converted into a pulanda and it was given serial No.1, whereas fake currency notes recovered from accused Mohd. Jamal were also converted into a pulanda and it was given serial No.2. The genuine currency note recovered from accused Mohd. Jamal was also converted into a pulanda and was given serial No.3 whereas two fake currency notes exchanged in lieu of one genuine currency note were converted into a pulanda and was given serial No.4. All these pulandas were seized vide seizure memos Ex.PW4/A to Ex.PW4/D. Accused persons disclosed that they had taken said fake currency notes from one Kamar Abbas. 3 HC Rohtash Kumar prepared a rukka Ex.PW5/A and got the case registered. Duty Officer HC Mukesh Kumar(PW1) recorded FIR Ex.PW1/A and made his endorsement Ex.PW1/B on the rukka. After registration of the FIR, further investigation of the case was assigned to SI Rajender Kumar(PW3). He recorded statements of witnesses under section 161 Cr.P.C. Accused Mohd Jafar was arrested vide arrest memo Ex.PW3/D and his personal search was conducted vide memo Ex.PW3/F. Accused Mohd. Jamal was arrested SC No.41/10/09 State Vs. Mohd. Jafar etc. Page 4 of 24 vide memo Ex.PW3/E and his personal search was conducted vide memo Ex.PW3/G. Their disclosure statements Ex.PW3/B and Ex.PW 3/C were also recorded. IO prepared site plan Ex.PW3/A. Search for accused Kamar Abbas was made at village Sakhni, District Bulandsahar, UP but he was not traced out.
4 Recovered fake currency notes were examined by Sh. V.G.Maru(PW7) vide his report Ex.PW7/A. 5 After completion of the investigation, chargesheet was filed in the Court of Ld. M.M. who after complying with provisions of section 207 Cr.P.C. committed the case to the Court of Sessions which in turn assigned the case to this Court for trial in accordance with law.
6 Supplementary chargesheet against accused Qamar Abbas was filed and my ld. Predecessor vide order dated 13.05.2010 discharged him.
7 After hearing Ld. Counsel for the accused and Addl. PP for the State, charges under Section 489B/489C/34 IPC were framed against both the accused which read as under: "That on 28.04.2009 at about 06.10 p.m. at Pushta Road, Taj Enclave T Point, Geeta Colony, Delhi, you SC No.41/10/09 State Vs. Mohd. Jafar etc. Page 5 of 24 both in furtherance of your common intention were found trafficking counterfeit currency notes of the denomination of Rs.1000/ and 98 such counterfeit notes were recovered from you accused Mohd. Jafar and 80 such counterfeit notes were recovered from you accused Mohd.Jamal knowing or having reasons to believe the same to be counterfeit and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 489B/34 IPC and within the cognizance of this court. Secondly, on the date, time and place mentioned above, you both in furtherance of your common intention had in your possession aforesaid counterfeit currency notes knowing or having genuine and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 489C/34 IPC and within the cognizance of this court."
8 Accused persons pleaded not guilty to the charges and claimed a trial.
9 In order to prove its case, prosecution has examined seven witnesses. PW1 HC Mukesh Kumar was the duty officer in the police station at the relevant time. PW2 HC Digvijay Singh, PW4 Ct. Harender and PW6 Ct. Rajender remained associated with the investigation of the case conducted by Investigating Officers PW5 HC Rohtash Kumar and PW3 SI Rajender Kumar. PW7 Sh. V.G.Maru SC No.41/10/09 State Vs. Mohd. Jafar etc. Page 6 of 24 examined the counterfeit currency notes at Currency Note Press, Nasik, Maharashtra.
10 After completion of prosecution evidence, statements of accused persons under section 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded in which they have denied the case of the prosecution in toto. They have stated that they were lifted from somewhere else and falsely implicated in the present case. The alleged fake currency notes have been planted upon them and nothing was recovered from them. Accused Mohd. Jafar opted to lead evidence in his defence whereas accused Mohd. Jamal did not opt to lead any defence evidence.
11 Accused Mohd. Jafar examined five witnesses viz. DW1 HC Ranjeet Singh, DW2 HC Dalel Singh, DW3 Rifaqat Ali, DW4 Natiq Abbas and DW5 HC Raghuvir Singh.
12 I have heard. Ld. Addl. PP for the State as well as Ld. counsel for accused persons. I have meticulously gone through their submissions and material available on record.
13 It has been argued by ld. Addl PP for the State that both the accused were apprehended while trafficking and using the counterfeit currency notes. It is further argued that a trap was laid in SC No.41/10/09 State Vs. Mohd. Jafar etc. Page 7 of 24 which both the accused were apprehended. Fake currency notes were recovered from the accused persons which has been duly established on record. It is further argued that prosecution has proved its case against accused persons beyond reasonable doubt. 14 On the other hand, ld. Defence counsel has argued that testimony of witnesses is full of material contradictions and benefit of doubt must be given to accused persons. It is further argued that accused persons were lifted from different places and thereafter were roped in the present case. No recovery was effected from them, rather it was planted one. It is further argued that the defence evidence led by accused proves that accused Mohd. Jafar was already in police custody before laying trap.
15 To prove its case, prosecution has examined HC Rohtash Kumar as PW5 who was the initial IO of the case as well as Trap Laying Officer. He deposed that on 28.04.2009, he along with Ct. Rajender(PW6) and Ct. Harender(PW4) was on patrolling duty at 7 Block, Geeta Colony, Rani Garden. At about 5.30 p.m., he received secret information that two boys were standing at the corner of Taj Enclave having fake currency notes and that they were selling two SC No.41/10/09 State Vs. Mohd. Jafar etc. Page 8 of 24 fake currency notes against one genuine note. PW6 Ct. Rajender was in civil dress and he handed over a currency note of Rs.1,000/ to Ct. Rajender. He prepared a handing over memo Ex.PW4/E. Ct. Rajender was directed to make a deal with those persons and after completion of deal give signal. Rest of the team took position near the spot.
16 Ct. Rajender(PW6) deposed that on the direction of HC Rohtash(PW5), he approached the accused persons. He had a talk with accused Jamal and gave genuine currency note to him and accused gave him two currency notes of Rs. 1000/ denomination. He gave signal to the IO and raiding party reached there. They overpowered both the accused. IO took search of accused persons. 80 currency notes of Rs. 1,000/ denomination were recovered from accused Jamal, whereas 98 currency notes of Rs. 1,000/ denomination were recovered from another accused. The genuine currency note given by him was recovered from pocket of accused Jamal. He handed over the two currency notes of Rs. 1,000/ denomination to the IO which he received from accused Jamal. IO prepared four different pulandas containing 98 currency notes, 80 currency notes, 1 genuine SC No.41/10/09 State Vs. Mohd. Jafar etc. Page 9 of 24 currency note and 2 currency notes which were taken into possession vide memos Ex.PW4/A to Ex.PW4/D. 17 IO prepared rukka and he took the same to the PS and got the FIR registered. After registration of FIR, further investigation was carried out by SI Rajender(PW3). Both the accused were arrested vide memos Ex.PW3/D and Ex.PW3/E and their disclosure statements Ex.PW3/B and Ex.PW3/C were recorded. He identified the case property i.e. fake as well as genuine currency notes as Ex.P1 to Ex.P5.
18 During cross examination, PW6 stated that he had seen the accused persons for the first time at a distance of about 3035 feet. Accused persons were standing at the corner of park. IO had put his signatures on the genuine currency note given to him and its number was 4CD 591459. The accused persons did not try to run him on seeing him. He further stated that when he gave signal to the police party, accused persons were surrounded and that is why they did not run away. He apprehended accused Jamal whereas HC Rohtash and Ct. Harender apprehended accused Jafar. 19 From the testimony of Ct. Rajender (PW6), the SC No.41/10/09 State Vs. Mohd. Jafar etc. Page 10 of 24 presence of the accused persons at the spot has been established. He has specifically stated that he apprehended accused Jamal whereas accused Jafar was apprehended by other police personnel. He also specifically stated that he saw the accused at the spot at a distance of about 3035 feet. The identity of accused persons has also been established as the witness identified both the accused. This witness was the decoy customer sent by the IO to the accused persons to make a deal. As per his testimony, he made a deal with accused persons and gave them a genuine currency note of Rs 1,000/ and in exchange thereto, he got two fake currency notes of Rs 1,000/ denomination. 20 IO HC Rohtash Kumar(PW5) corroborated the testimony of PW6 Ct. Rajender. He stated that after receipt of signal, he along with police party apprehended both the accused. From the search of accused Jafar, 98 fake currency notes of Rs.1,000/ each were recovered whereas 80 fake currency notes of Rs. 1,000/ denomination were recovered from accused Jamal. He also stated that one genuine currency note was recovered from accused Jamal and that Ct. Rajender handed over two fake currency notes which he exchanged from accused Jamal. He further stated that he compared genuine notes with the counterfeit recovered notes. He found that paper of SC No.41/10/09 State Vs. Mohd. Jafar etc. Page 11 of 24 counterfeit currency notes was of rough surface. He seized the currency notes. He identified the notes as Ex.P1 to Ex.P5. 21 During cross examination, he stated that Ct. Rajender was in plain clothes. He formed raiding party at a distance of 300 meters from the place of receiving secret information. Accused persons were present at a distance of 5060 meters. He was cross examined at length but the defence has failed to put any dent to his testimony.
22 Similarly Ct. Harender(PW4) who was also member of the police party also deposed on the similar lines. He has also corroborated the testimony of PW6 Ct. Rajender and PW5 HC Rohtash Kumar by saying that after receipt of secret information, PW6 Ct. Rajender was sent to the accused persons as a decoy customer to make a deal with them for purchase of fake currency notes. He also stated that fake currency notes were recovered from accused persons. His testimony is almost on the similar lines of PW5 HC Rohtash Kumar and PW6 Ct. Rajender.
23 It has been argued that no independent witness was joined by the IO in the recovery of alleged fake currency notes from SC No.41/10/09 State Vs. Mohd. Jafar etc. Page 12 of 24 accused persons and for the proceedings conducted at the spot. He has further argued that since no efforts were made by the IO to join public persons, accused persons are entitled for acquittal. 24 It is true that HC Rohtash Kumar as well as other police personnel who were present at the spot have admitted that public persons were present near the spot, but they have clarified that IO had requested those public persons to join the proceedings but they refused and left the spot without disclosing their names and addresses. It is quite natural that public persons do not come forward to join the police proceedings. Public is generally reluctant to depose against criminals to distant themselves from the repercussions of deposing against them. In view of the fact that lage number of counterfeit currency notes were recovered from accused persons and the witnesses produced by the prosecution supported its case, I am of the considered opinion that the testimony of police witnesses cannot be discarded for the reason that no public witness was attached with the proceedings conducted at the spot.
25 Ld. Defence counsel has further argued that there are several discrepancies and contradictions in the statements of witnesses produced by the prosecution. In his written arguments, he has pointed SC No.41/10/09 State Vs. Mohd. Jafar etc. Page 13 of 24 out certain such contradictions.
26 Before appreciating the arguments advanced by ld. Counsel for the accused persons, it is indeed necessary to note that one hardly comes across a witness whose evidence does not contain some exaggeration or embellishment. Sometimes, there could be a deliberate attempt to offer embellishment and sometimes in their over anxiety they may give a slightly exaggerated account but it is for the court to sift the chaff from the grain and find out the truth from the testimony of the witnesses. Total repulsion of the evidence is unnecessary. The evidence is to be considered from the point of view of trustworthiness. If this element is satisfied, it ought to inspire confidence in the mind of the court to accept the stated evidence though not, however in the absence of the same.
27 I am not convinced with the contention of ld. Defence counsel on this score inasmuch as the witnesses produced by the prosecution have deposed against the accused. They have categorically deposed that counterfeit currency notes were recovered from the possession of accused persons. I have gone through the ratio of judgments in case titled State of U.P. Vs. M.K. Anthony, AIR 1985 SC 48 ; State of Rajasthan Vs. Om Prakash, AIR 2007 SC 2257 ; SC No.41/10/09 State Vs. Mohd. Jafar etc. Page 14 of 24 State Vs. Saravanan and Others, AIR 2009 SC 152 and Prithu @ Prithvi Chand and Another Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh, (2009) 11 SCC 588 wherein it has been consistently been held that while appreciating the evidence of a witness, minor discrepancies on trivial matters, which do not affect the core of the prosecution's case, may not prompt the court to reject the evidence in its entirety. Irrelevant details which do not in any way corrode the credibility of a witness cannot be labelled as omissions or contradictions. Difference in some minor detail, which does not otherwise affect the core of the prosecution case, even if present, would not itself prompt the court to reject the evidence on minor variations and discrepancies. After exercising care and caution and sifting through the evidence to separate truth from untruth, exaggeration and improvements, the court comes to a conclusion as to whether the residuary evidence is sufficient to convict the accused. Thus, an undue importance should not be attached to omissions, contradictions and discrepancies which do not go to the heart of the matter and shake the basic version of the prosecution witness. As the mental capabilities of a human being cannot be expected to be atuned to absorb all the details, minor discrepancies are bound to occur in the statements of witnesses.
SC No.41/10/09 State Vs. Mohd. Jafar etc. Page 15 of 24 28 In my considered view the discrepancies and contradictions pointed out by the ld. Defence counsel are minor and does not go to the root of the case. Such discrepancies are bound to occur and it is natural for a human being not to memorize each and every thing in the same manner as it happened. A careful reading of testimony of abovementioned witnesses inspires confidence. Their testimony is quite nature and trustworthy and there is no reason to disbelieve their testimony on the ground of minor discrepancies and contradictions.
29 The other aspect of the matter is that the counterfeit currency notes recovered from the accused persons were sent for obtaining expert's opinion. PW7 Sh. V.G. Maru, Assistant Works Manager of Currency Note Press, Nasik examined those notes and gave his report Ex.PW7/A. As per his report, the suspected notes of Rs.1,000/ denomination were counterfeit notes due to the reason that the paper was not genuine; main watermark and security thread were imitated; printing ink colours were not matching; colour registration was not correct; numbering of the notes was not as per genuine notes; the intaglio printing of the test was absent; OVI effect of the figure 1000 in the centre was missing; RBI seal lacks the sharpness and fine SC No.41/10/09 State Vs. Mohd. Jafar etc. Page 16 of 24 details of Ashoka Pillar were missing. It was also observed that on the back side of said notes, tint design lacks sharpness and printing ink colours did not match with the genuine note.
30 I have gone through the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in case titled K. Hashim Vs. State of Tamil Nadu AIR 2005 SC 128 in which the accused persons were convicted for the offence punishable under Section 489C of IPC apart from other offences. In the said case, on search of accused eight bundles of counterfeit US dollars of 20 denomination were recovered. While upholding the conviction, it was observed that Section 133 of Evidence Act has to be read with Section 114, illustration (b). The latter section empowers the Court to presume the existence of certain facts and the illustration elucidates what the Court may presume and makes clear by means of examples as to what facts the Court shall have regard in considering whether or not maxims illustrated apply to a given case. It was further observed that rule is that the necessity of corroboration is a matter of prudence except when it is safe to dispense with such corroboration must be clearly present in the mind of the Judge. 31 In the present case, Ct. Rajender(PW6) approached the accused persons as a decoy customer and struck a deal with them. SC No.41/10/09 State Vs. Mohd. Jafar etc. Page 17 of 24 In the said deal, accused persons exchanged two counterfeit currency notes of Rs. 1,000/ denomination for one genuine currency note of Rs. 1,000/. On search, 98 counterfeit currency notes of Rs. 1,000/ denomination were recovered from accused Mohd. Jafar whereas 80 counterfeit currency notes of same denomination were recovered from accused Mohd. Jamal. The testimony of PW6 Ct. Rajender has duly been corroborated by the testimony of HC Rohtash Kumar(PW5), PW4 Ct. Harender. Even their testimony has been corroborated by the report of Expert Ex.PW7/A which also proves the case of prosecution that the currency notes recovered from accused persons were counterfeit for the reasons set out in the report. 32 So, it has also been established from the report Ex.PW7/A that the notes recovered from the possession of accused persons were counterfeit currency notes. The report Ex.PW7/A also corroborates the testimony of PW6 Ct. Rajender, PW4 Ct. Harender and IO PW5 HC Rohtash Kumar.
33 Accused Mohd. Jafar has taken the defence that he was picked up from his factory on 28.04.2009 at about 3.45 p.m. i.e. prior to his alleged apprehension in the present case. To establish this fact, he has examined five witnesses. DW3 Rifaqat Ali and DW4 SC No.41/10/09 State Vs. Mohd. Jafar etc. Page 18 of 24 Natiq Abbas have deposed this fact in their testimony. DW3 Rifaqat Ali stated that he informed the Police Control Room regarding taking away of his brother accused Jafar.
34 DD No.20 Ex.DW2/A, DD No. 60 Ex.DW2/2, and DD No.40 Ex. DW2/3 have also been relied upon by the accused Jafar. Vide DD No. 20 Ex.PW2/A, an information was received from the informant that his brother was taken away by 4/5 boys. The PCR form Ex.DW1/A also shows that an information was received in control room that brother of informant was picked up by 45 boys. But the fact remains that except brothers of the accused Jafar i.e. DW3 and DW4, no other persons either from the factory in which accused Jafar and his brother were allegedly working or any person from the locality has been examined to establish this defence. Even otherwise in the PCR call as well as in DD No.20, name of informant and the person picked up has not been mentioned. Though brother of accused Jafar, Rifaqat Ali has stated that he had given a call to the police at number 100 from his mobile No. 9310932736. However, in his cross examination by Ld. Addl PP, he has stated that he did not have any documentary proof to show that said mobile phone was owned or used by him.
SC No.41/10/09 State Vs. Mohd. Jafar etc. Page 19 of 24 35 In view of above discussion, I am of the view that accused Jafar has failed to probabilise his defence. Conclusion 36 In view of above discussion, prosecution has successfully established that a trap was laid by HC Rohtash Kumar(PW5). PW6 Ct. Rajender was made a decoy customer who made a deal for exchange of counterfeit currency notes from accused persons in exchange of genuine currency note. It has been established that accused persons were found in possession of fake currency notes and that they were trafficking in the same. The recovery of counterfeit currency notes from accused persons has also been established beyond reasonable doubt.
37 The accused Mohd. Jafar has tried to make out a defence that he was picked up by police prior to the present case and that he was falsely roped in the present case. But he has failed to probabilise his defence. The evidence produced by him is not convincing to draw an inference that he was picked up prior to his apprehension in the present case. Rather from the testimony of witnesses coupled with report of Expert Ex.PW7/A, it has been established beyond reasonable doubt that accused persons were not SC No.41/10/09 State Vs. Mohd. Jafar etc. Page 20 of 24 only in possession of counterfeit currency notes but trafficked in the same as well.
38 In view of above discussion, both the accused persons, namely, Mohd. Jafar and Mohd. Jamal are hereby held guilty for commission of offences punishable under section 489B and 489C read with Section 34 of IPC and they are convicted thereunder.
Announced in the open Court ( P.S. TEJI )
Dated: 04.06.2012 District Judge and
Addl. Sessions Judge, I/C (East)
Karkardooma Courts : Delhi
SC No.41/10/09 State Vs. Mohd. Jafar etc. Page 21 of 24
IN THE COURT OF SHRI P.S. TEJI : DISTRICT JUDGE &
ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE, I/C (EAST), KARKARDOOMA
COURTS, DELHI.
SC No.41/10/09
Unique Case ID No.02402R0180542009
FIR No.90/2009
Police Station Geeta Colony
Under Section 489B/489C/34 IPC
State Versus Mohd. Jafar etc.
ORDER ON SENTENCE
Vide my judgment dated 04.06.2012, the convicts Mohd. Jafar and Mohd. Jamal have been convicted for offences under Section 489B/489C/34 IPC.
2 I have heard Ld. Addl. PP for the State as well as Ld. counsel for the convicts on the point of sentence. 3 The learned Addl. PP has argued that convicts have committed a heinous crime of trafficking in counterfeit currency notes and using them as genuine. It is further argued that counterfeit currency notes in huge number were recovered from the possession of SC No.41/10/09 State Vs. Mohd. Jafar etc. Page 22 of 24 convicts.
4 On the other hand, on behalf of convict Mohd. Jafar, it has been submitted that he is 45 years of age. He is having four minor children in his family. It is further submitted that convict Mohd. Jafar has already remained in custody for about eight months. On behalf of convict Mohd. Jamal, it has been submitted that he is 34 years of age. Apart from his wife in the family, he is having old aged widow mother. It is further submitted that convict Mohd. Jamal has already remained in custody for 8 months 15 days. Learned counsel for convicts has argued that the convicts are the sole bread earner of the family. Ld. Counsel has prayed for taking a lenient view while awarding sentence to the convicts.
5 The offences of counterfeiting currency notes for using them as genuine, trafficking in them and possessing them are offences of grave nature and can not be lightly viewed. Such offences vitiate the economy of the country and are a matter of serious concern. They are rarely detected and all that is ultimately proved is perhaps the tip of an iceberg. The offence under Section 489B prescribes imprisonment for life as the maximum punishment which itself shows the seriousness with which the legislature has viewed the offence. SC No.41/10/09 State Vs. Mohd. Jafar etc. Page 23 of 24 6 In view of facts and circumstances of the present case, both the convicts Mohd. Jafar and Mohd. Jamal are hereby awarded rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and fine of Rs. 20,000/ each for the offence punishable under Section 489B/34 IPC. In default of payment of fine, convicts shall further undergo SI for six months. Both the convicts are also awarded rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and fine of Rs.10,000/ each for the offence punishable under Section 489C/34 IPC. In default of payment of fine, convicts shall further undergo SI for six months. 7 Both the sentences of the convicts shall run concurrently. The convicts shall be entitled for the benefit of the provisions of Section 428 of Cr.P.C. Copies of the judgment and order on sentence be given free of cost to the convicts.
File be consigned to record room.
Announced in the open Court ( P.S. TEJI )
Dated: 07.06.2012 District Judge and
Addl. Sessions Judge, I/C (East)
Karkardooma Courts : Delhi
SC No.41/10/09 State Vs. Mohd. Jafar etc. Page 24 of 24