Delhi District Court
State vs . Amit Jain on 15 September, 2010
1
IN THE COURT OF SH. SANJEEV AGGARWAL
ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE-V: ROHINI COURTS: DELHI
SC No. 352/09
ID No.02401R0805552005
FIR No. 293/05
PS Adarsh Nagar
U/s 489B/489-C/489-D IPC
State Vs. Amit Jain
S/o Sh. Anand Kumar Jain,
R/o BK1/161, Shalimar Bhagh,
Delhi.
Date of Institution in Sessions Court : 16.07.2007
Date of transfer to this Court: 31.08.2009
Date of Judgment : 15.09.2010
JUDGEMENT
1. In brief, the prosecution story is that on 17.06.2005, SI Kishan Lal, HC Vijay Kumar and Ct. Anil Kumar, during patrolling duty reached bus terminal Azadpur and when they reached near fruit carts in Azadpur Mandi, many persons had gathered there, at around 10:00-11:00 p.m. Complainant Kamal Kishore, produced one person, by the name of Amit Jain and also produced one 100 rupees note, bearing No. 5LH 996028, which was counterfeit and got recorded the State Vs. Amit Jain PS Adarsh Nagar FIR No.293/05 2 following statement to the I.O SI Kishan Kumar.
"That he was selling muskmelons on cart outside Azadpur Bus Terminal. On 17.06.2005, he was selling musk melons as usual. At around 11:00 p.m, one person, whose name was later on revealed as Amit Jain S/o Anand Kumar Jain came there and purchased 3 Kgs of muskmelon and gave Rs. 100/- to him. On checking the same, it was found to be counterfeit and the said person asked for the change for the remaining amount, after deducting the price of the 3 Kgs muskmelon. He thereafter, on suspicion showed the said currency note to his companion fruit sellers, who all stated that the said was counterfeit. At this, he tried to run away, but he was caught and was handed over to the police officials, who had come to the spot in the meanwhile."
2. On the said complaint, a rukka was written by SI Kishan Lal and he sent Ct. Anil Kumar to the PS Adarsh Nagar and got registered an FIR U/s 489B/420 IPC.
3. After registration of the FIR, personal search of the accused State Vs. Amit Jain PS Adarsh Nagar FIR No.293/05 3 was conducted. On checking the same, 10 currency notes of 100 denomination were recovered from his possession, which were seized vide seizure memo. In the meanwhile, one another person, namely, Sri Kishan also came there and informed SI Kishan Lal that the same person had given him one counterfeit note of Rs. 100/- in the same manner on 16.06.2005 for purchase of watermelons and muskmelons. The said currency note was also seized separately.
4. Thereafter, at the instance of the complainant site plan of the place of occurrence was prepared. Accused was arrested. Accused made a disclosure statement and pursuant to disclosure statement he lead the police party to his house, bearing No. BKY 1/161, Shalimar Bagh and on his instance one printer, ink and another papers, which he used to print the counterfeit currency notes were also seized from his house.
5. Thereafter, the relevant currency notes seized from the accused and other documents were sent to the Government Examiner of Questioned Documents, Simla for forensic evaluation. State Vs. Amit Jain PS Adarsh Nagar FIR No.293/05 4 Later on, Section 489C/489D were also added in the charge sheet and after completion of the investigation(s), a charge sheet U/s 489B/489C/489D/420 IPC was filed in the court.
6. Upon committal of the case to the court of Sessions, a charge(s) U/s 489B/489C/489D IPC were framed against the accused vide order dt. 26.05.2008, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
7. Thereafter, the prosecution in support of its case has examined six witnesses. PW1 is ASI Mohd. Saleem, the duty officer, who has proved the copy of the FIR Ex.PW1/A, PW2 is Kamal Kishore, complainant, who has turned hostile, PW3 is Shri Kishan, another complainant, who had stated to the police that the accused had also given him one fake currency note of Rs. 100/- on previous occasion, he has also turned hostile, PW4 is SI Kishan Lal, the I.O of this case, who has deposed regarding the investigation, carried out in this case, PW5 is Dr. S. Ahmed, Assistant Government Examiner of Questioned Documents, Simla, who has proved his opinion Ex.PW5/A, PW6 is State Vs. Amit Jain PS Adarsh Nagar FIR No.293/05 5 HC Vijay Kumar, who was accompanying the I.O on 17.06.2005 to the spot, during the patrolling duty and was important recovery witness.
8. Thereafter, statement of the accused U/s 313 Cr.P.C was recorded, in which the defence of the accused was that he had been falsely implicated in this case and all the police officials were deposing falsely against him and that is why complainant Kamal Kishore and Shri Kishan had not deposed anything against him. He also denied that anything was recovered from his possession or at his instance and the entire recovery was planted one. However, he chose not to lead any defence evidence.
9. I have heard the Ld. Defence counsel Sh. Sachin Dev Sharma and Ld. Addl. PP for the state Sh. G.S. Guraya.
10. The Ld. Defence counsel has argued that in the present case both the material prosecution witnesses PW2 Kamal Kishore and PW3 Shri Kishan had turned hostile, regarding the handing over of fake currency notes by the accused to them and they have also not supported the recovery of ten other currency notes from his State Vs. Amit Jain PS Adarsh Nagar FIR No.293/05 6 possession. He has argued that both the independent witnesses in this case had turned hostile and therefore, the entire prosecution story was palpably false that even otherwise the forensic report Ex.PW5/A does not support the prosecution version or corroborate the same, therefore he has prayed that the accused deserves to be acquitted.
11. On the other hand, Ld. Addl. PP for the state has argued that from the testimony of I.O PW4 and that of HC Vijay Kumar, another recovery witness, the prosecution has been able to prove that from the possession of the accused certain currency notes were recovered, which were found to be counterfeit and the same is also corroborated by the report of Government Examiner of Questioned Documents, Simla, and certain documents and printers were recovered from the house of accused at his instance, by which he used to prepare the counterfeit currency notes, which proves his culpability. Consequently, he has argued that accused deserves to be convicted.
12. I have gone through the rival contentions.
13. In the present case PW2 Kamal Kishore and another public State Vs. Amit Jain PS Adarsh Nagar FIR No.293/05 7 witness PW3 Shri Kishan to whom allegedly the accused had given counterfeit currency notes of Rs. 100/- denomination have both turned hostile and none of them have supported the prosecution story regarding the giving of said 100/- rupees currency note to them by the accused. Both of them have stated that the accused was not the person who had given them the said counterfeit currency notes of Rs. 100/- and police had apprehended some other person from the crowd and police obtained their signatures on certain blank papers.
14. Though, the IO SI Krishan Lal and H.C. Vijay Kumar another recovery witness have stated that on 17.6.05 when they were on patrolling duty near Azadpur Bus Terminal and when they reached near the fruit's Rehari, a crowed was found there and one person by the name of Kamal Kishore produced the accused alongwith one fake currency note of Rs. 100/- denomination and his statement was also recorded and said currency note was also seized and from his possession 10 other fake currency notes of Rs. 100/- State Vs. Amit Jain PS Adarsh Nagar FIR No.293/05 8 denomination each were recovered and thereafter one another person Kamal Kishore came there and he also informed that the same accused had given him one more currency note which was counterfeit, on 16.6.05 for purchase of muskmelon and thereafter the disclosure statement of the accused was recorded after his arrest and accused pursuant to his disclosure statement lead to his house at Shalimar Bagh and from the room situated at 2nd floor got recovered one printer alongwith black cord and one ink tec containing three small bottles of blue, yellow and red ink and white photostate papers which were also seized.
15. However, both the public witnesses complainant PW2 Kamla Kishore and PW3 Shri Kishan have not been supported the prosecution story regarding the recovery of 10 currency notes from the possession of accused, which were the counterfeit and both of them have stated that their signatures were obtained on blank papers and complainant PW2 Kamal Kishore stated that though his signatures were appearing on Ex.PW2/B, Ex.PW2/C and State Vs. Amit Jain PS Adarsh Nagar FIR No.293/05 9 Ex.PW2/D, but police got signatures on the same lateron.
16. There is no independent corroboration with regard to the recovery of 10 currency notes and one currency note each given to the police by complainant Kaml Kishore and another public witness Shri Kishan. PW4 SI Krishan Lal has also admitted that they had made a departure entry while leaving the police station, but he does not remember whether the copy of the same had been filed on the record. Making the very fact, that the police party was on patrolling duty on that day, as doubtful. He also admitted that a cash of Rs. 12,650/- was recovered from the personal search of the accused, but the same was not sent for forensic examination, as they were not fake currency notes. He further admitted that the house of the accused was situated in a thickly populated area and 1-2 neighbours were asked to join the investigations, but none agreed and no ownership receipt regarding the printer was seized by him. In these circumstances, the recovery of printer alongwith black cord and one ink tec containing three small bottles of blue, yellow and State Vs. Amit Jain PS Adarsh Nagar FIR No.293/05 10 red ink and white photostate papers recovered persuant to the disclosure statement of the accused also becomes doubtful, as no independent witness had been joined by the IO to make the said recovery valid and trustworthy. Even the FSL report Ex.PW5/A does not support the prosecution version, as in the said report it has been opined by the Forensic Examiner that "It has not been possible to definitely express whether the counterfeit Indian currency notes marked Q1 to Q12 and Q1/1 to Q12/1 were printed from the material exhibit marked MQ-1 hp officejet 4255 all-in-one printer-fax-scanner-copier."
17. In view of the said report given by the Forensic Examiner of questioned documents, that it was not possible to definitely express that the currency notes which were allegedly sent to him for examination were printed from the printer in question.
18. In these circumstances, the opinion of examiner of questioned document also does not go in favour of the prosecution. Therefore, this also goes to the root of the prosecution case that the alleged State Vs. Amit Jain PS Adarsh Nagar FIR No.293/05 11 currency notes which were allegedly recovered from the possession of the accused could not have been printed with the help of printer recovered at the alleged instance of the accused from his house.
19. As discussed above, the recovery of 10 currency notes from the possession of the accused and one each currency note of Rs. 100/- which was allegedly given by the accused to PW2 and PW3 is found to be highly doubtful as both the said witnesses PW2 and PW3 have turned hostile and there is no other independent witness to corroborate the testimony of police officials on the recovery part and the recovery of printer and other instruments from the house of the accused is also doubtful as no independent witness has been joined in the same nor any efforts were made in this regard by the IO. Even the Forensic opinion does not go in favour of the prosecution as it has come in the said report that the questioned counterfeit currency notes could not have been printed from the printer seized at the instance of the accused in pursuant to his disclosure statement. In these circumstances, the entire State Vs. Amit Jain PS Adarsh Nagar FIR No.293/05 12 prosecution story regarding the recovery of currency notes and printer at the instance of accused becomes highly doubtful. Consequently, the accused is hereby acquitted of the charge(s) U/s 489-B, 489-C and 489-D IPC by extending him benefit of doubt. His bail-bonds are cancelled. Surety stands discharged. Endorsement(s) if any, made on the original documents of the accused and surety be cancelled. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced in the open court (Sanjeev Aggarwal)
On 15.09.2010 Addl. Sessions Judge
Rohini Courts: Delhi.
State Vs. Amit Jain PS Adarsh Nagar FIR No.293/05