Delhi District Court
State vs Kurian Thomas ..(Proclaimed Offender) on 24 August, 2012
IN THE COURT OF SH. VIRENDER KUMAR GOYAL
ADDL SESSIONS JUDGE: FAST TRACK COURT
ROHINI:DELHI
SC No. 09/1
Unique Identification No. 02404R1002282003
State
Versus
1. Kurian Thomas ..(Proclaimed offender)
Son of Mathai Thomas
R/o C269, Tagore Garden, Delhi
2. V. O. John
Son of John Joseph
R/o 730 Pocket 6, Sector2
Rohini, Delhi
FIR No. 667/03
PS - Rajouri Garden
U/s. 489B, 489C of IPC
Date of institution of the case: 14.10.2003
Arguments heard on: 14/08/2012
Date of reservation of order: 14/08/2012
Date of Decision: 24/08/2012
JUDGMENT
In brief, this case was registered on the statement of one Sunil Kohli on 16/08/2003 u/s 489C of IPC.
During the course of investigation, copy of register no.19 was collected. Copy of RC was collected. Counterfeit notes of Rs. 10,000/ were SC No. 09/1 1/16 taken into possession. Rough site plan was prepared.
Accused Kurian Thomas and V.O. John were arrested in this case. Their personal searches were conducted. Both the accused made their disclosure statements.
Accused Kurian Thomas further got recovered counterfeit currency notes of Rs.5000/ and accused V.O. John got recovered counterfeit notes of Rs. 7000/. Scooter no. DL8SZ0480 was also taken into possession. The counterfeit currency notes were sent to Currency Notes Press, Nasik road for opinion and the report was obtained.
On completion of investigation, chargesheet was filed u/s 489B and 489C of IPC against both the accused persons. Case was committed to the Court of Sessions on 09/12/2003 and was received on 19/12/2003.
Charge u/s 489B/34 of IPC was framed against both the accused persons on 28/02/2005 to which they both pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Separate charge u/s 489C of IPC was framed against accused Kurian Thomas and V.O. John, to which they both pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. During the proceedings accused Kurian Thomas was declared proclaimed offender.
To prove its case, prosecution has examined PW1 to PW10 in all. On completion of evidence of prosecution, statement of accused V.O. John was recorded, wherein he has stated that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated, in this case. He was arrested by calling to PS Rajouri Garden and not at the alleged site/spot, Tagore Garden. Nothing has been recovered from him or at his instance. Police never visited at his house. He has been falsely implicated because he was the only relative of coaccused in Delhi.
SC No. 09/1 2/16
I have heard Ld APP for State, learned defence counsel for the accused and have gone through the evidence adduced with material placed on record.
Complainant of the case is PW5 Sunil Kohli. He has stated that he was having garment shop at D24, Tagore Garden Ext, New Delhi for the last 2025 years. Accused V.O. John used to visit his shop to purchase garments. In the year 2003, accused V.O. John came to his shop and told him that if he will give him Rs. 5000/ then he would give him Rs.10,000/ i.e. duplicate currency notes of Rs.10,000/ for circulating in the market.
PW5 has further deposed that his friend Vinit Bakshi was also sitting with him at his shop, at that time and he suggested him that accused V. John be called on the next day with counterfeit currency and accordingly PW5 asked the accused to come to his shop, on the next day. Thereafter, accused V.O. John left the shop. On the next day, accused V. John came alone to his shop, in the afternoon. Thereafter his friend Vinit Bakshi had also came to his shop. The beat constables M.M. Khan and Raman were sitting at their beat seat, which was situated near his shop. PW5 went to the seat of the beat police officials and informed them that a person was sitting at his shop to exchange counterfeit currency. Both the police officials came to his shop and they had taken accused V. John from his shop. The accused had already given him counterfeit currency of Rs.10,000/, before he called the police officials.
PW5 has further deposed that his statement was recorded Ex.PW5/A and he handed over the currency notes to police, which were given to him by accused V. John. Same were seized vide memo Ex. PW2/A, after keeping the same in a packet, but it was not sealed in his presence. Accused SC No. 09/1 3/16 V.O. John had came to his shop on foot.
As PW5 has not supported the case of prosecution, so he has been cross examined by Ld APP, wherein he recollected and deposed that it was accused Kurian Thomas, who came at his shop initially and offered him counterfeit currency of Rs.10,000/ to circulate in the market and he was asked by him to pay only Rs.5000/ against the said counterfeit currency.
PW5 Sunil Kohli has further deposed in the cross examination that on the next day, accused Kurian Thomas came to his shop alongwith accused V.O. John and on his asking, accused Kurian Thomas took out counterfeit currency notes of Rs.10,000/ and gave to him. PW5 has further deposed that he does not remember whether counterfeit currency notes packet of Rs.10,000/ was sealed with the seal of SK but he recollected that accused Kurian Thomas was initially interrogated by police and recorded his statement Ex. PW2/B. He has further stated that he does not remember whether accused both came to his shop on a two wheeler scooter, which was taken into possession by the police but he has admitted his signatures on the seizure memo Ex.PW5/B. PW5 has contradicted with his complaint Ex.PW5/A. In the complaint, PW5 had told to the police that on the next day at about 6.30 pm, he was sitting in his shop with his friend Vinit Bakshi, whereas before the Court he has stated that when accused V. O. John came to his shop in the afternoon, thereafter his friend Vinit Bakshi also came to his shop, so the contradiction is material and creating doubt on the trustworthiness of this witness.
According to the statement of PW5 Ex.PW5/A, he had stated to the police that he asked both the accused to sit in a shop and told that he will bring Rs.5000/. He came outside the shop to call the police but in the gali, he saw Ct SC No. 09/1 4/16 Raman and Ct M.M. Khan with ASI Suresh Kumar and he narrated the facts to the police officials and handed over the accused persons with currency notes of Rs.10,000/ whereas before the Court PW5 has stated that beat Raman and M.M. Khan were sitting at beat seat of the beat police officials and informed them that a person was sitting at his shop to exchange counterfeit currency. Both the police official came to his shop and they had taken accused V. John from his shop. So it is also doubtful whether there were two police officials or three police officials. It is also doubtful whether police officials were already present in the gali or were called from the police beat.
Even before the Court PW5 has given his contradictory statement as firstly he named accused V.O. John only and stated that he had come to his shop on foot, whereas in the cross examination conducted by Ld APP, he has deposed the facts as per the case of prosecution, which shows that this witness cannot be relied upon and further in the cross examination conducted on behalf of accused V.O. John, PW5 has admitted that he recollected the other facts of the case as were stated by the prosecution to him in the court.
The conduct of PW5 is also doubtful as he did not disclose the facts of previous day conversation took place regarding the handing over the counterfeit notes and in such circumstances, if this was true, then PW5 should have informed the police in advance about the visit of accused persons on the next day to deliver the counterfeit currency notes, which shows that the story of visit of accused persons on previous day and asking PW5 to hand over Rs. 5000/ in lieu of counterfeit notes of Rs.10,000/ is concocted one just to implicate the accused persons.
According to the case of prosecution, accused V.O. John is residing in Rohini and according to PW5 Sunil Kohli, accused V.O. John SC No. 09/1 5/16 used to visit his shop to purchase his garments, which also seems to be improbable because there are so many other markets in Rohini and in surrounding areas and it is not disclosed as to why accused used to visit his shop to purchase garments. In the cross examination, PW5 has admitted that accused V.O. John was known to him before the incident but he was not knowing that accused V.O. John and accused Kurian Thomas were relatives, which also seems to be improbable. PW5 has not been able to depose as to on what context, he was knowing accused V.O. John, so he cannot be relied upon, in any manner.
Again PW5 Sunil Kumar has contradicted himself in the cross examination with his examination in chief by saying that on the first day, when accused persons for the first time came to his shop, his friend Vinit Bakshi was not there, whereas in the examination of chief, he has stated that at that time, his friend Vinit Bakshi was also sitting with him and again further self contradicted by saying in the cross examination that on the next day his friend Vinit Bakshi was sitting at his shop, whereas in the cross examination he has stated that on the next day, after arrival of accused V.O. John is friend Vinit Bakshi also came there. So the contradictions are material.
According to the cross examination of PW5, on the day of incident, three police officials came to his shop, thereafter he went to PS with them, whereas, in the chief examination, he has stated that he called the beat constables i.e. Ct Raman and Ct Mohd. M. M. Khan at his shop and they had taken accused V.O. John along with them. In the cross examination, PW5 has also stated that police officials did not do any writing work at his shop , but they took the currency notes in their possession and he had handed over the notes of Rs.10,000/ to the police. In such circumstances, if no writing work SC No. 09/1 6/16 was done at the shop of PW5 Sunil Kohli, then preparation of rukka and sending the same for registration of the case from the spot seems to be doubtful.
PW5 Sunil Kohli has further admitted in the cross examination that he had signed all the papers in the PS and all the writing work was done in the PS by police officials, which is contradictory to the deposition of police officials, who had deposed that writing work was done at the spot.
According to the cross examination of PW5, on the day of incident, he had not visited any other place with the police official except the PS, whereas according to examination of PW7 Ct Raman, complainant Sunil Kohli and his friend Vinit Bakshi were with them at the time of sealing and seizing the currency notes, which were recovered from the houses of both the accused persons, which means that PW5 and his friend Vinit Bakshi remained with the police, even at the time of alleged recovery of counterfeit notes of Rs. 5000/ and Rs.7000/ from the respective houses of the accused persons.
PW2 Vinit Bakshi has stated that on 16/08/2003, at about 6.30, he was present at the shop of his friend Sunil Kohli at D24, Tagore Garden, Delhi. At that time, both the accused persons came on the shop and told his friend Sunil Kohli that they had brought the currency notes. Then accused Kurian Thomas asked his coaccused V.O John to produce the currency notes to Sunil Kohli and thereafter accused V.O John took out currency notes of Rs. 10,000/ in the denomination of Rs.100/, from the pocket of his pant and handed over the same to Sunil Kohli and demanded Rs.5000/ from Sunil Kohli for his currency notes of Rs.10,000/.
PW2 has further deposed that Sunil Kohli asked the accused persons to sit in the ship and he will just bring Rs.5000/ then he went outside SC No. 09/1 7/16 and called the police there. Sunil Kohli also handed over the counterfeit currency notes, to the police, which were given by accused persons. Accused both were apprehended by the police. The police officials had also signed the currency notes and sealed them in a pullanda with the seal of SK and seized the same vide memo Ex. PW2/A. Then rukka was prepared and was sent to PS at about 8.35 pm, through a constable, who came to the spot with the copy of FIR at about 9.15 pm. Disclosure statement of accused Kurian Thomas was also recorded Ex. PW2/B, in his presence.
PW3 Vinit Bakshi has no where deposed that the previous day i.e. on 16/08/2003, he was present at the shop of PW5 Sunil Kohli and in his presence, conversation had taken place about deliver of counterfeit currency notes to PW5 Sunil Kohli.
PW2 cannot be relied upon as he has stated in the cross examination that police had taken his signatures on 23 papers but he does not remember which those papers are. He had not read 23 papers on which his signatures were taken by the police. Police had stated that they took signatures on his statement and other documents were not disclosed to him, which shows that PW2 was not aware about the contents of the documents, which allegedly were signed by him and in this sense, he cannot be deemed to be a witness of the seizure memo of currency notes Ex.PW2/A and disclosure statement of Kurian Thomas Ex.PW2/B. PW2 has also denied the suggestion that accused Kurian Thomas was interrogated in his presence, which shows that accused Kurian Thomas was not interrogated in his presence and his signatures were taken on some papers, which were prepared by police at their own. This fact is contradictory with deposition of PW5, who has stated in the cross examination that no writing work was done at the spot and all the papers SC No. 09/1 8/16 were prepared by the police in the PS, whereas PW2 has not stated so. So this contradictions are raising doubts on the testimony of PW2 Vinit Bakshi.
According to PW9 SI Suresh Chand, he was on patrolling duty alongwith Ct Raman and Ct M.M. Khan in the area of PS Rajouri Garden on 16/08/2003 and at about 6.00/6.30 pm, they were sitting at police booth situated near holi child public school, Tagore Garden. At that time, one person who was standing opposite Gurudwara near police booth gave signal to call them and they reached there and that person told his name as Sunil Kohli and further told that two persons were sitting at his cloth shop and they had given Rs.10,000/ to him and they were demanding Rs.5000/ in lieu of Rs.10,000/. Sunil Kohli had further told him that those two persons had told him that the above mentioned 10,000/ currency notes given to him were counterfeit and they were demanding Rs.5000/ genuine currency notes in lieu of that.
PW9 has further deposed that thereafter they along with Sunil Kohli reached at his office and he pointed out towards those two persons, who were sitting in his shop. One Vinit Bakshi was also present there, at that time. PW9 has further deposed that he made inquiries from those two persons and thereafter apprehended and interrogated them. Sunil Kohli also handed over Rs. 10,000/ counterfeit currency notes in denomination of Rs.100 each to him. He took the same into possession vide memo Ex. PW2/A and he recorded the statement of Sunil Kohli Ex. PW5/A and he prepared rukka Ex. PW7/A on the same and got registered the case through Ct M.M. Khan. He also prepared the site plan of the place of occurrence at the instance of complainant Ex. PW9/A . After getting registered the case, Ct M.M. Khan reached at the spot with the copy of FIR and rukka and handed over the same to him. PW9 has further deposed that accused both made disclosure statement. He SC No. 09/1 9/16 arrested accused V.O. John vide memo Ex. PW7/B and accused Kurian Thomas vide memo Ex.PW7/E. Personal search of accused V.O. John was conducted vide memo Ex. PW7/D and of accused Kurian Thomas was conducted vide memo Ex. PW7/E. Accused Kurian Thomas made his disclosure statement vide memo Ex. PW2/B and accused V.O. John made his disclosure statement vide memo Ex. PW7/F. PW9 is contrary to the statement of PW5 and PW7, as PW5 has stated that only two constables were called and accused was taken by them to PS and PW7 Ct Raman had stated that accused Kurian Thomas and V.O. John came at the shop of Sunil Kohli alongwith counterfeit currency notes to circulate them. At that time, he and Ct M.M. Khan were standing at the gate of shop of Sunil Kohli. Thereafter they entered in the shop and Sunil Kohli produced counterfeit currency notes of Rs.10,000/ and told that these notes were delivered to him by accused persons saying that they wanted a sum of Rs.5000/ genuine Currency notes in lieu of Rs.10,000/. Both the accused persons were produced by Sunil Kohli alongwith their aforesaid currency notes before ASI.
These facts are contrary to the depoisition of PW9 SI Suresh Chand, whereas he has deposed that he was present with two constable and they were called by Sunil Kohli and when they reached at his shop, he produced the accused persons and handed over counterfeit currency notes of Rs.10,000/.
From the statement of Ct Raman, it appears that Ct M.M. Khan and Ct Raman were already present at the gate of shop of PW5 Sunil Kohli and PW5 did not go to beat to call them. Counterfeit currency notes of Rs. 10,000/ were neither recovered from V.O. John or from Kurian Thomas but were produced by PW5 Sunil Kohli himself to the police, so it is not proved SC No. 09/1 10/16 that this counterfeit currency notes were handed over to Sunil Koli either by accused V.O. John or by both the accused persons or were recovered from either accused.
Ld defence counsel has contented that story of the police booth/beat office is totally false as the said beat box has not been shown in the rough site plan. It is admitted by PW7 in his cross examination, so the witness cannot be relied upon to that extent.
PW8 HC M.M. Khan has also deposed the same facts as of PW9 SI Suresh Chand and has further deposed that one partner namely Vinit Bakshi was also present there whereas according to PW5 Sunil Kohli, Vinit Bakshi was his friend.
PW8 has made lot of improvements from his statement recorded u/s 161 Cr.PC and he has been confronted with the statement. The improvements are material regarding the fact as told by Sunil Kohli about the accused persons, who had handed over sum of Rs.10,000/ to him and further that both the accused were demanding Rs.5000/ in lieu of Rs.10,000/. PW8 has also been confronted with the fact that Sunil Kumar left his shop by saying that he was going to arrange Rs.5000/ to give the same to accused persons but went to PP to call police.
PW8 has further made improvement regarding the disclosure of both the accused persons to the extent that they had told that they could get recover counterfeit currency notes from their residential house and one two wheeler was taken into possession, on which both the accused persons reached at the shop of of Sunil Kumar.
PW8 has further made improvement from his statement recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C to the extent that accused V.O. John led them to flat no. 730, SC No. 09/1 11/16 ground floor, Sector2, Pocket6, Rohini, Delhi and he took out one yellow colour polythene bag before the IO, which was checked and found containing 70 counterfeit currency notes of Rs.100/ denomination. Seizure memo of this counterfeit notes Ex. PW7/H is signed by Ct M.M. Khan and if he did not tell this fact to the IO, in his statement recorded u/s 161 Cr.Pc, then recovery of these counterfeit currency notes of Rs.7000/ from the house of accused V.O. John itself is doubtful, so he cannot be relied upon.
Police officials have contradicted each other about the facts as to whether accused V.O. John was residing at ground floor or at first floor, second floor or whether the house was belonging to him or was tenanted premises.
Similarly PW7 has also been confronted with his statement recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.c about the delivery of counterfeit coins by accused persons to Sunil Kumar of Rs. 10,000/ against which they wanted a sum of Rs.5000/. PW7 has also been confronted with the fact that scooter was seized on which both the accused persons had reached at the shop of Sunil Kohli. PW7 has also been confronted with the fact that accused V.O. John led them at house no. flat no. 730, first floor, Sector2, Pocket6, Rohini, Delhi and took polythene bag containing 70 counterfeit currency notes of Rs.100/ denomination each.
PW7 has deposed about the first floor whereas PW8 Ct M.M. Khan has deposed about ground floor, so it is not certain whether the recovery of Rs. 7000/ counterfeit notes was effected from ground floor or first floor of the house of accused V.O. John, so the same seem to be tainted one.
Seizure memo of this currency notes Ex.PW7/H is signed by both constables as a witness but neither any neighbour was called nor it was SC No. 09/1 12/16 disclosed as to whether any family members of accused was present at that time or not, so it seems to be improbable that such recovery was effected from the possession of accused V.O. John as deposed by witnesses. Even if, the said premises was tenanted one then the land lord was not called to join the investigation, which raises doubts on the alleged manner of recovery.
Two wheeler scooter seems to be planted against the accused persons as PW5 Sunil Kohli has deposed before the Court that accused V.O. John had came to his shop on foot and even in the cross examination conduced by Ld APP, he failed to recollect that both the accused persons came to his shop on two wheeler, which was seized, in this case. PW8 has also made improvement before the Court about the seizure of two wheeler scooter as he had not told this fact in his statement recorded u/s 161 of Cr.P.C.
PW10 is Sh. M.D. Bagul, retired Deputy works Manager. He has deposed that on 03/10/2003, he was working as Assistant Works Manager, currency notes press, Nasik and on that day, three sealed pullandas containing 220 currency notes of Rs.100/ denomination were received in his office alongwith forwarding letter of Addl. Deputy Commissioner of Police, requesting for seeking expert opinion about the aforesaid currency notes in this case and the same were marked to him for examination.
PW10 has further deposed that he examined all 220 notes by comparing with the genuine specimen notes. He found that security features i.e. design on the notes, paper, colour, security thread, water mark, process of printing, colours of shades, numbering style of those 220 currency notes were SC No. 09/1 13/16 not matching with the genuine currency notes as these security features were not existing on those 220 notes. He gave his opinion that 220 currency notes of Rs.100/ denomination were counterfeited notes. PW10 has also proved his report as Ex.PW10/A, in this respect.
PW10 has also identified the said currency notes, which were examined by him, before the court collectively as Ex.P1 to P3. His report is not disputed as such but before that it has to be seen whether prosecution has been able to prove the recovery of these counterfeit currency notes from accused V.O. John, beyond reasonable doubts.
In this respect, PW5 Sunil Kohli has not been able to corroborate the case of the prosecution with his statement, on which this case was registered against the accused. He was cross examined by Ld APP, even then he failed to corroborate the same in sum and substance and his testimony also raises doubt as to whether accused V.O. John came on foot or both accused Kurian Thomas and V.O. John reached there on scooter. Admittedly the alleged counterfeit notes were handed over to police by PW5 Sunil Kohli and these were not recovered by police from accused persons.
Another witness Vinit Bakshi has also not corroborated with PW5 Sunil Kohli regarding the fact of previous day visit of accused persons to the shop of PW5. Both these witnesses have no where deposed that after the arrest of both the accused by police party, they accompanied police party to the respective houses of the accused persons and witnessed the recovery of counterfeit notes, from their houses, whereas the police witnesses have stated so, hence the same is raising doubts in the testimony of witnesses about the SC No. 09/1 14/16 further recovery of counterfeit currency notes from the house of accused V.O. John.
Police officials have also not been able to corroborate about the place of recovery, which raises doubts as to whether the recovery from the house of accused V.O. John was actually effected as deposed by other witnesses in the said manner. There is no public witness to the recovery of counterfeit currency notes from the house of accused V.O. John nor any family member has signed the memo as a witness. On one hand complainant and PW2 Vinit Bakshi and on the other hand, police witnesses have contradicted each other regarding the fact as to where the writing work was done. According to PW5 Sunil Kohli, accused was taken to PS and all the writing work was done there, whereas according to police officials all the writing work was done at the place of recovery i.e. at the shop of PW5 Sunil Kohli and further at the respective places i.e. houses of accused persons. So these contradictions are material and rendering the witnesses unreliable.
In view of the above, merely that alleged currency notes were found counterfeited currency notes, after examination by the expert, is not helpful to the case of prosecution because the arrest and recovery of the counterfeit currency notes from accused V.O. John is itself doubtful. Witnesses are not inspiring any confidence and are not trustworthy, in any manner, hence I am unable to rely upon them to held guilty accused V.O. John for the offences charged against him.
Accordingly, prosecution has not been able to prove beyond reasonable doubts that accused V.O. John used counterfeit currency notes as genuine or traded with the same and further prosecution has also not been able SC No. 09/1 15/16 to prove beyond reasonable doubts the possession of counterfeit currency with accused V.O. John, so both the offences 489B and 489C have not been proved beyond reasonable doubts, as such accused V.O. John is acquitted for the same.
Announced in the open court On 24th of August, 2012 (Virender Kumar Goyal) Additional Sessions Judge Fast Track court, Rohini/Delhi SC No. 09/1 16/16 SC No. 09/1 17/16