Delhi District Court
State vs Suraj on 13 August, 2024
IN THE COURT OF MS. SHEFALI BARNALA TANDON
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE -05: WEST : DELHI.
DLWT010009962016
CNR No. DLWT-01-000996-2016
Case No. 57012/2016
FIR No. 142/2016
PS Nihal Vihar
U/s 489B/489C IPC
STATE
VERSUS
RAHEESH
S/o Mr.Abdul Jabar
R/o Village Bakhao Toli,
PS Thakurgunj, District Kishanganj,
Bihar.
Date of Institution 12.04.2016
Date of Committal 25.04.2016
Charge framed Under Section 489B and 489C IPC against the
accused Raheesh.
Date of conclusion of final 09.08.2024
arguments and reserving
Judgment
FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.1 of 31
PS Nihal Vihar
Date of Pronouncement of 13.08.2024
Judgment
Final Judgment Accused Raheesh is acquitted of the
Charge u/s 489B IPC and 489C
IPC.
JUDGMENT
1. The accused Raheesh has been facing trial of the charge for having possession of 265 counterfeit currency notes of the denomination of Rs.1,000/- each, which he possessed knowing or having reasons to believe the same to be forged or counterfeit and intending the same as genuine and he has received these notes from his associate Subhaan Khan S/o Farzool Mohd (not arrested).
Facts emerging from the Charge-sheet are as under:
2. On 14.02.2016, SI Hawa Singh alongwith Ct. Surender and Ct. Sandeep were on patrolling duty and at about 08:35 PM, when they were present at Mangal Bazar Road, near Diler Mehandi Gurudwara, Nihal Vihar, secret informer informed them that one boy who was resident of Bihar, had come from Bihar having counterfeit currency notes in the denomination of Rs.1,000/- and circulates in the area of Nihal Vihar and other parts of Delhi while purchasing anything of amount Rs.100- 150/- by giving the said fake currency notes of denomination of Rs.1000/- He further informed that today i.e. on 14.02.2016, FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.2 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar the said boy will come at Aggarwal Sweet, Chander Vihar to meet his friend while having the counterfeit currency notes and if raid is conducted soon, he can be apprehended. On this information, IO prepared the raiding party and requested the public persons to join the raiding party however, none had agreed. Thereafter, at about 08:50 PM, IO alongwith the secret informer and other staff reached at Aggarwal Sweet, Chander Vihar. At about 09:10 PM, one person was seen coming from the side of Keeker Chowk, Nihal Vihar, Chander Vihar and on the pointing out of secret informer, IO apprehended the said person with the help of raiding staff.
3. During personal search of accused, from the right-side pocket of his pants, two bundles and from the left side of his pants, another two bundles were recovered, which were wrapped in the newspaper and brown colour tape was affixed upon them. On checking the two bundles of right side pocket of pants of accused, total 100 notes i.e. 39 notes of 7581 series and 61 notes of 4132 series were recovered in one bundle and in another bundle, total 18 notes i.e. 07 notes of 4096 series; 07 notes of 7222 series; 02 notes of 8199 series and 02 notes of 2986 series were recovered.
4. On checking the two bundles of left side pocket of pants of accused, total 97 notes i.e. 41 notes of 7224 series; 46 notes of 5886 series and 10 notes of 5877 were recovered in one bundle and from another bundle, total 50 notes i.e. 30 notes of 7572 FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.3 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar series and 20 notes of 7569 series were recovered. On inquiry, the said person disclosed his name as Raheesh @ Vinod S/o Mr. Abdul Jabbar. Thereafter, IO checked all the bundles of said counterfeit currency notes and in total Rs.2.65 lacs counterfeit currency notes were sealed with the seal of HSM and had taken into possession vide seizure memo. Accused Raheesh disclosed that Subhan used to bring the counterfeit currency notes from Kishan Ganj, Bihar and he (accused) used the said counterfeit currency notes in the different areas of Delhi and thereafter, he had given the half share to Subhan. He further disclosed that prior to that day, he has already used the counterfeit currency notes of Rs.30,000/- in the market. Thereafter, case was registered against the accused for the offence punishable u/s 489B IPC and investigation was conducted in the present matter.
5. During investigation, IO had prepared the site plan. Accused Raheesh was arrested and his disclosure statement was recorded wherein he has also disclosed that one Anwar who was also resident of Bihar, had met Subhan and they both had given him Rs.30,000/- counterfeit currency notes in the denomination of Rs.1,000/- for using in the market and after using the same in the market, he had transferred Rs.15,000/- into the account of Subhan. During investigation, search was made for accused Subhan and Anwar however they were not apprehended.
FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.4 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar
6. The seized Rs. 2.65 lacs counterfeit currency notes were sent for examination to Currency Note Press, Nasik. NBWs of both the accused Subhan and Anwar were obtained and thereafter, the proceedings u/s 82/83 Cr.P.C. were also conducted. On completion of investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against accused Raheesh before the Court.
7. On 25.11.2016, IO has filed opinion report of the examination of counterfeit currency notes, vide supplementary charge-sheet.
CHARGE:
8. Thereafter, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions. On 02.06.2016, charge for the offences Punishable Under Section 489-B and 489-C IPC was framed against the accused to which he pleaded 'not guilty' and claimed trial.
9. On 20.10.2018, supplementary charge-sheet was filed against accused persons namely Anwar @ Mister @ Tuffel and Subhan Khan. Both the accused persons had surrendered and their police custody remand were obtained from the concerned Court however, no recovery could be affected.
10. Further, vide said order dated 20.10.2018, the Ld. Predecessor had observed as under:
"The only material that the Prosecution depicts from supplementary charge-sheet against accused Anwar and Subhan Khan is disclosure statement of accused Raheesh and their own disclosure statements which are hit by Section 25 of the Indian FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.5 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar Evidence Act. There is no other incriminating evidence against them to indicate their complicity in the offence complained of. No Charge whatsoever is made out in these circumstances against both the accused persons namely anwar and Subhan Khan. Hence, both of them stands discharged for the offence punishable u/s 489B IPC."
The Trial:
Prosecution Evidence:
11. To bring home the guilt of the accused, the prosecution in total has examined eight witnesses i.e. PW-1 ASI Badlu Ram ( duty officer), PW-2 Tilak Pal Singh (deposited pullanda in govt. of India Press, Nasik), PW-3 HC Harish Chander (MHC/M), PW- 4 ASI Surender Singh (witness of investigation), PW-5 Retired SI Shri Krishan (2nd Investigating officer who filed the charge- sheet), PW-6 Ct.Sandeep Kumar (witness of investigation), PW-7 Ct.Parvinder Kumar (DD writer) and PW-8 SI Hawa Singh (1st Investigating Officer).
12. Admission/denial under Section 294 Cr.P.C. was conducted, wherein the accused admitted the opinion report from Currency Note Press, Nasik dated 29.09.2016 as Ex.CD/SW. In view of above-said admission, Ld. Prosecutor dropped Sh. J.K.Chaudhary, Asstt. Manager (Tech. Oper.).
13. PW-1 ASI Badlu Ram is the duty officer and he has proved the FIR as Ex.PW-1/A which was recorded vide DD no. 54A; his FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.6 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar endorsement as Ex.PW-1/C and Certificate u/s 65B of the Indian Evidence Act as Ex.PW-1/B.
14. PW-2 Sh. Tilak Pal Singh, Ex-Sub Inspector has deposed that he had worked as SI in Delhi Police from the year 2008 till July, 2016. On 02.03.2016, he under the instruction of the then SHO, had collected one sealed pullanda from malkhana in the present case and obtained a letter from the SHO for depositing the case property in Govt. of India Press, Nasik. He left Delhi for Nasik on 02.03.2016 itself. The case property in the present case was taken vide RC no. 39/21/16. He has further deposed that he reached Nasik on the next day and deposited the case property alongwith letter from the SHO in Govt. of India Press, Nasik. Copy of letter signed by the SHO which was deposited alongwith the case property and is bearing acknowledgment from Currency Note Press is proved as Ex.PW-2/A. Copy of Road Certificate no. 39/21/16 bearing impression of stamp and signatures indicating acknowledgment of the case property is proved as Mark PW-2/B. He has further deposed that the case property remained in sealed intact condition in his custody and he deposited the acknowledgment with the MHC(M) after returning Delhi.
14.1. This witness was re-examined by the Ld. Prosecutor on the aspect of clarification regarding the number of pullandas qua the case property, after seeking permission of the Court wherein the witness after seeing contents of Ex.PW-2/A and the FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.7 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar corresponding acknowledgment from Nasik Press, stated that he had carried four pullandas in the present case.
15. PW-3 HC Harish Chander is MHC(M) and he has deposed that on 15.02.2016, ASI Hawa Singh had deposited the case property i.e. four pullandas bearing the seal of HSM in the present case and he had made an entry in this regard in register no. 19 at srl.no. 1384, photocopy of the same is proved as Ex. PW-3/A. He has further deposed that on 02.03.2016, he had handed over the pullandas deposited in the present case to SI Tilak Singh for depositing the same in Govt. Press, Nasik, vide RC No. 39/21/16, proved as Ex.PW-3/B (earlier marked as Mark PW-2/B) and he had made an entry to this effect in the corresponding column in register no.19 at the encircled portion X on Ex.PW-3/A. 15.1. He has further deposed that on 04.10.2016, as per record, MHC(M) Satish Kumar had received from HC Mahesh, one sealed envelope from Forgery Detection Cell, Currency Note Press, Nasik and one another sealed envelope containing opinion/report in the present case. An entry to this effect is available in register no.19 in the corresponding column of entry no. 1384 and is at portion Y on Ex. PW-3/A.
16. PW-4 ASI Surender Singh has deposed that on 14.02.2016, at about 08:35 PM, he alongwith ASI Hawa Singh and Ct. Sandeep was patrolling in the area of Diler Mehndi, Chander Vihar. When they reached at Aggarwal Chowk, secret informer FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.8 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar met ASI Hawa Singh and informed that a person resident of Bihar is circulating fake currency notes of Rs.1,000/- denomination in Delhi. If raid is conducted immediately, he can be apprehended from Kikker Chowk, Chander Vihar. ASI Hawa Singh shared the information with few public persons passing thereby and requested them to join police team in conducting raid. No one from those public persons agreed to join the police proceedings on personal grounds and left without disclosing their names and addresses. The secret informer suggested ASI Hawa Singh to conduct the raid immediately, so that the person may not flee away. Raiding team comprising of himself, Ct. Sandeep and ASI Hawa Singh was constituted and they took the secret informer towards Kikker Chowk, Chander Vihar. At about 09:10 PM, a person was approaching from Kikker Chowk towards Chander Vihar on foot. He was pointed out by the secret informer as the person who is circulating fake currency notes. That person is the accused Raheesh who was apprehended. He was casually searched by ASI Hawa Singh.
16.1. He has further deposed that during his search, two bundles of currency notes of Rs.1,000/- denomination were recovered from right as well as left side pocket of his pants. Both the bundles were recovered while the same were covered with the newspaper wrapped with a brown colour Tape. IO counted the currency notes so recovered from the accused. The FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.9 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar total amount of Rs.2,65,000/- was comprised in those two bundles. All the currency notes were of Rs.1,000/- denomination. After physical examination of the currency notes made by all of them, the notes even by their touch & make were appearing to be fake. Accused also disclosed that the notes were fake. IO/ASI Hawa Singh had seized the said currency notes by wrapping them in white cloth and sealed the cloth with the seal of HSM. This witness has voluntarily deposed that he did not remember how many pullandas were prepared by the IO. The currency notes were seized by the IO vide Seizure memo, proved as Ex.PW-4/A. 16.2. He has further deposed that IO/ASI Hawa Singh had prepared rukka and handed it over to Ct.Sandeep for getting the FIR registered. Ct.Sandeep returned with print out of FIR and original Tehrir at the spot, which he handed over to ASI Hawa Singh. Accused was arrested by ASI Hawa Singh vide Arrest Memo, proved as Ex.PW-4/B. IO had also prepared site plan in his presence, proved as Ex.PW-4/C. Personal search of the accused was also conducted vide Memo, proved as Ex.PW-4/D. Case property was deposited in the malkhana. This witness has proved correctly identified the accused Raheesh before the Court as well as the currency notes as Ex.P.1 (colly.); all the white pullandas as Ex.P.2 (colly.) and packets wrapped with brown colour tape as Ex.P.3.
17. PW-5 Retired SI Shri Krishan has deposed that on 02.03.2016, FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.10 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar further investigation of this case was assigned to him and he has perused the file. On the same day, he sent the case property i.e. parcels containing fake currency notes to Nasik Press through SI Tilak Pal Singh and recorded the statement of MHC(M) and SI Tilak Pal Singh. After completing the investigation, he filed the charge sheet in the Court.
18. PW-6 Ct. Sandeep Kumar has deposed that on that day, he alongwith ASI Hawa Singh and Ct.Surender was on patrolling duty in the area of Mangal Bazar. At about 08:35 PM, they were present near Diler Mehandi Gurudwara, Mangal Bazar, Chander Vihar. Delhi. In the meanwhile, one secret informer came and informed that one person who is resident of Bihar was involved in supplying the fake currency notes in Delhi. He further informed that said person would come near Aggarwal Sweet Corner. Aggarwal Chowk, Chander Vihar at about 09:00 PM, if raided, he could be apprehended. IO/ASI Hawa Singh formed the raiding party comprising of himself and Cr.Surender. He requested some passersby to join the raiding party but none agreed and they left the spot without disclosing their names and addresses. Then all the members of raiding party and secret informer went near Aggarwal Sweet Corner. Aggarwal Chowk and started waiting for the offender after hiding themselves.
18.1. He has further deposed that at about 09:10 PM. secret informer pointed towards one person who was coming from the FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.11 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar side of Keeker Chowk and thereafter, he left the spot. That person was apprehended by all of the members of raiding party. IO interrogated that person who disclosed his name as Raheesh. Accused was wearing a lower. IO checked the pockets of the lower of the accused and recovered two packets each from both the pockets of his lowers. The currency notes in the packets were in the denomination of Rs.1,000/-. On interrogation, accused disclosed that these currency notes were fake which he had brought from Nepal. The two packets which were recovered from the right-side pocket, were comprising of 100 notes and 18 notes respectively in the denomination of Rs.1,000/- each. The two packets recovered from the left side pocket of the lower of accused were comprising of 97 notes and 50 notes respectively in the denomination of Rs.1,000/- each. The series of all the recovered notes were different and their serial numbers were not in continuation. IO took the photographs of the recovered notes of all the four packets. IO prepared four parcels of the recovered four packets of fake currency notes and sealed all the four parcels with the seal of HSM. He handed over his seal to Ct. Surender after its use. All the sealed parcels were seized by the IO vide seizure memo, proved as Ex.PW- 4/A. Then IO prepared a Tehrir which he took to PS and got registered the FIR. After registration of the case, duty officer handed over rukka and copy of FIR to him which he took to the spot and gave the same to SI Bhanwar FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.12 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar Singh. After getting the case registered, he came to the spot and handed over copy of FIR and original rukka to IO ASI Hawa Singh. He has further deposed that inadvertently on 02.04.2019, the name of SI Bhanwar Singh has been recorded to whom he gave copy of FIR, however, he gave copy of FIR to ASI Hawa Singh and not to SI Bhanwar Singh. IO/ASI Hawa Singh interrogated accused Raheesh and arrested him in the present case vide arrest memo, proved as Ex.PW4/B. His personal search was conducted vide memo, proved as Ex.PW4/D. IO also recorded disclosure statement of accused Raheesh, proved as Ex.PW6/A. IO counted the Counterfeit currency notes recovered from accused and same were found valuing Rs. 2.65 lacs. Thereafter accused was got medically examined in SGM hospital and then he was taken to Ps Nihal Vihar and put in the lock-up. This witness has proved correctly identified the accused Raheesh before the Court as well as the currency notes as Ex.P.1 (colly.); all the white pullandas as Ex.P.2 (colly.) and packets wrapped with brown colour tape as Ex.P.3.
19. PW-7 Ct.Parvinder Kumar has deposed that on 14.02.2016 at about 08:10 PM, ASI Hawa Singh made his departure entry for patrolling duty alongwith Ct.Surender Singh and Ct.Sandeep in the DD register vide DD no. 60B in his presence. Attested copy of DD no. 60B is proved as Ex.PW-7/A and copy of DD no. 60B is proved as Ex.PW-7/A.1.
20. PW-8 SI Hawa Singh, 1st Investigating officer has deposed that FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.13 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar On 14.02.2016, he alongwith Ct. Surender and Ct. Sandeep were on patrolling duty vide DD No.60B, proved as Ex.PW7/A. During patrolling duty at about 08:35 PM., they were present at Mangal Bazar Road, near Diler Mehndi Gurdwara, Nihal Vihar, Delhi, where one secret informer met him and informed that one person having fake currency notes having denomination of Rs.1000/- and used to circulate in the area of Nihal Vihar and other part of Delhi while purchasing anythings of amount Rs.100-150/- and used to give the said fake currency notes denomination of Rs.1000/- and he will come at Aggarwal Sweets, Chandra Vihar, Delhi with the fake currency notes to meet with his friend and he can be apprehended if raided. After receiving the said information, he had also informed to Ct. Surender and Ct. Sandeep about the same and prepared a raiding party. He had requested public persons available there but they refused to join the raiding party. No written notice can be given to them due to lapse of time. They alongwith secret informer reached at Aggarwal Sweets Chandra Vihar at about 08:50 P.M., they took out position. At about 09:10 PM., one person was noticed who was coming from the side of Keekar Chowk, Nihal Vihar, Chander Vihar and while seeing him, secret informer had pointed out towards him and informed that this is the said person. The said person was apprehended with the help of Ct. Sandeep and Ct. Surender. During interrogation he disclosed his name as Rahees. He took the formal search of FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.14 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar accused Rahees and two bundles of currency notes from his right pocket of wearing lower (pajama) and another two bundles of currency notes were recovered from the left pocket of his wearing lowers. The said recovered four bundles were wrapped in a newspaper and were tapped with the brown colour tape.
20.1. He has further deposed that the two bundles, which were recovered from right pocket of accused, were opened and it found containing of currency notes of denomination of Rs.1000/-. The said recovered currency notes were counted and it were containing 100 notes in one bundle and 18 in second bundle. He had checked the series number of the said notes. One bundle of said notes were having 39 currency notes of one series and 61 currency notes of another series. The second bundle of notes were having 18 currency notes of denomination of Rs. 1000/- and it were of different series number. He did not remember the complete series numbers of abovesaid recovered currency notes; however, he had mentioned the same in the seizure memo of the said currency notes. The same were again wrapped in the same newspaper. The bundle of 100 currency notes was given serial No.1 and the second bundle which was having 18 currency notes were given serial no.2. He had also prepared pullanda of these two bundles of currency notes by wrapping the same in white cloth and sealed with the seal of HSM. The said recovered currency notes were appearing to be FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.15 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar fake. Another two bundles, which were recovered from the left pocket were given serial No.4. He had also prepared pullanda of these two bundles of currency notes by wrapping the same in white cloth and sealed with the seal of HSM. The said recovered currency notes were also appearing to be fake. The total recovered abovesaid currency notes were of Rs.2,65,000/-. The said recovered currency notes were taken into possession through seizure memo, proved as Ex.PW4/A. The seal was handed over to Ct. Surender. after its use.
20.2. He has further deposed that he had prepared rukka, proved as Ex.PW8/A and handed over same to Ct. Sandeep at about 10:50 PM, for getting FIR registered. Ct. Sandeep went to Police Station with rukka and after registration of FIR, Ct. Sandeep returned to the spot and handed over copy of FIR and original rukka to him. He had prepared the site plan, proved as Ex.PW4/C. Thereafter, he had arrested accused vide arrest memo, proved as Ex.PW4/B. His personal search was conducted vide personal search memo, proved as Ex.PW4/D. In his personal search at the time of arrest, Rs.3600/- and two mobile phones with SIM cards were also recovered. He had also recorded the disclosure statement of accused, proved as Ex.PW-6/A. Thereafter, they went to Sanjay Gandhi hospital, where medical examination of accused was got conducted and the MLC was obtained from the hospital. Thereafter, they returned to Police Station alongwith accused and case property.
FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.16 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar
Another supplementary disclosure statement of accused was also recorded, proved as Ex.PW8/B. Accused was sent to the lockup and case property was deposited with Malkhana. 20.3. He has further deposed that on next day, he alongwith SI Shri Krishan produced accused before the concerned Court and moved an application for 07 days PC remand however, 05 days PC remand of accused was granted by the Court. Thereafter, further investigation of the present case was assigned to SI Shri Krishan. He has further deposed that on the direction of the then SHO, he had also obtained NBW against co-accused persons namely Anwar and Subhan on 29.03.2016. This witness has correctly identified the accused Raheesh as well as the recovered currency notes as Ex.P.1 (colly.); all white cloth of empty pullandas as Ex.P.2 and packets wrapped with the brown colour tape as Ex.P.3.
21. Thereafter, Prosecution evidence was closed vide order dated 10.07.2023 on submission of Ld. Prosecutor that all the prosecution witnesses as per the list of witnesses have been examined.
Statement of accused u/s 313 Cr.P.C. :
22. All the incriminating circumstances were put to the accused while recording his statement U/s 313 Cr.P.C, wherein he denied all the allegations levelled against him in the present case. He has deposed that at the time of incident, he was FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.17 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar residing as tenant at A-126, Chander Vihar, Delhi. One Anwar, who was his co-villager was residing in the adjacent house. On 14.02.2016, police officials came at the house of Anwar to arrest him however, he ran away from there and police officials lifted him, being his co-villager and brought him at the PS, where they told him to give Rs.4 lacs as bribe otherwise, they will be implicated him in the present case. Thereafter, at the Police Station, his landlord came and inquired as to why he has been arrested in the present case but they refused to say anything. He has been falsely implicated in the present case. The alleged recovery was falsely planted upon him. 22.1. The accused opted to lead evidence in his defence and had examined DW-1 Sh. Balbeer Singh who has deposed that accused Raheesh was his tenant. No incident had taken place in his presence. Accused Raheesh was arrested in his presence.
He also visited at PS Nihal Vihar where one police official namely Hawa Singh met him. He had inquired from him about the accused but he told him to go to home. Thereafter, he returned to his home. He did not say anything else.
Arguments addressed by the Ld. Prosecutor:
23. Ld. Addl. P.P. for the State submits that the prosecution has proved its case against the accused. The witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution with only minor discrepancies and the report has proved on record that the FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.18 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar currency notes which were in the possession of the accused at the time of his arrest were counterfeited. It is further submitted that recovered currency noted are total Rs.2.65 lacs and it is not possible to remember the serial number of every currency note as they were different currency notes and not from the same bundle. It is further submitted that there is no contradiction with respect to pullanda as number of pullandas have been well proved by PW-3 HC Harish Chander alongwith relevant entries in the register. It is further submitted that the content of document cannot be proved or disproved by oral evidence. Non joining of public witnesses has been properly explained by the police witnesses. Short duration of time was there and the raid was to be conducted at the earliest so there was no time to give the notice to public persons to join the investigation. It has been lastly, submitted that the judgment filed by the defence is only for 489C, whereas charge under section 489B is also framed against the accused.
Arguments addressed by the Ld.Defence Counsel :
24. Ld. Counsel for the accused submitted that there are only police witnesses out of which only PW-4 ASI Surender Singh, PW-6 Ct. Sandeep Kumar & PW-8 ASI Hawa Singh, are important witnesses and other witnesses are formal in nature. He has further submitted that there are contradictions regarding series number of currency notes; number of total pullandas deposited FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.19 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar by the IO as IO has deposed that he has deposited four pullandas and the PW-2 has deposed that only one pullanda was deposited. He has further submitted that accused stated that he has been arrested from his house and this fact has been proved by PW-4 ASI Surender Singh. He has further submitted that even DW-1 has deposed that the accused was arrested in his presence. Therefore, it is proved that the story put by the prosecution is concocted. The Ld. defence counsel has also placed reliance upon the Judgment titled as Umashankar v.
State of Chhattisgarh, 2001 Supp (3) SCR 646 . He further submitted that the accused is an innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case.
Appreciation of facts and analysis:
25. The Court heard the rival submissions advanced by Ld. Addl.
PP for the State and Ld. Counsel for the accused and have perused the entire material available on record carefully.
26. Before we proceed to discuss the evidence of the present case, it is apposite to refer the provisions of Section 489-B and 489- C.
27. The provisions of Section 489-A to 489-C deal with various economic offences in respect of forged or counterfeit currency notes or banknotes. The object of the legislature in enacting these provisions is not only to protect the economy of the country but also to provide adequate protection to currency FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.20 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar notes and banknotes.
28. The provisions of Sections 489-B and 489-C are quoted as under:
"489B. Using as genuine, forged or counterfeit currency-notes or bank-notes.-- Whoever sells to, or buys or receives from, any other person, or otherwise traffics in or uses as genuine, any forged or counterfeit currency- note or bank-note, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be forged or counterfeit, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.
"489C. Possession of forged or counterfeit currency- notes or bank-notes.-- Whoever has in his possession any forged or counterfeit currency-note or bank-note, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be forged or counterfeit and intending to use the same as genuine or that it may be used as genuine, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both".
29. A reading of aforesaid quoted Sections would go to show that to constitute an offence under Section 489B & 489C, following essential ingredients are necessary: -
(i) The note in question is a currency note or a bank note;
(ii) It was forged or counterfeited;
(iii) That the accused knew or had reason to believe it to be forged or counterfeited;
(iv) The accused was in possession and intended to use the same as genuine.
FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.21 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar
30. The first ingredient to be proved by the Prosecution was that the Note (s) in question were the Currency Notes and the second ingredient is that those notes were counterfeited. Both the ingredients have to be proved by the Prosecution by way of documentary evidence, which is discussed in the succeeding paragraphs.
Documentary Evidence :
31. The report of Currency Notes Press, Nasik, Maharashtra has been admitted by the accused and proved as Ex.CD/SW, wherein it is specifically stated that all the 265 Currency Notes of Rs.1,000/- denomination are 'High Quality Counterfeit Notes'.
32. Hence, in view of the documentary evidence proved on record by the prosecution in the form of report of Currency Notes Press, which is admitted document by the accused Raheesh, both the ingredients of Section 489B IPC as well as Section 489C IPC have been fulfilled and it is proved that the notes alleged to be recovered from the possession of accused Raheesh were counterfeit currency notes.
Ocular Evidence:
33. Now coming to the rest of the ingredients of offences charge, that (iii) That the accused knew or had reason to believe it to be forged or counterfeited, and (iv) that the accused was found in FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.22 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar possession of counterfeit currency notes and intended to use them as genuine.
34. In order to fulfill the aforesaid ingredients that the accused knew or had reason to believe it to be forged or counterfeited;
had possession of counterfeit currency notes and used the same as genuine, the first and foremost requirement is the presence of accused at the spot for commission of the said offences.
35. The accused stated in his statement u/s 313 Cr.P.C. that he was not present at the spot as he was arrested from his house in place of Anwar, for whom the police was searching and since Anwar fled away from the spot, he was taken to the police station and arrested in the present matter.
36. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Anand Ramachandra Chougule vs Sidarai Laxman Chougala reported in AIR 2019 SUPREME COURT 3871, has observed as under :
9. The burden lies on the prosecution to prove the allegations beyond all reasonable doubt. In contradiction to the same, the accused has only to create a doubt about the prosecution case and the probability of its defence. An accused is not required to establish or prove his defence beyond all reasonable doubt, unlike the prosecution. If the accused takes a defence, which is not improbable and appears likely, there is material in support of such defence, the accused is not required to prove anything further. The benefit of doubt must follow unless the prosecution is able to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt.
10. The fact that a defence may not have been taken by an accused under Section 313, Cr.P.C. again cannot absolve the prosecution from proving its case beyond all reasonable doubt.
If there are materials which the prosecution is unable to answer, the weakness in the defence taken cannot become the strength FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.23 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar of the prosecution to claim that in the circumstances it was not required to prove anything. In Sunil Kundu Vs. State of Jharkhan, (2013) 4 SCC 422, this Court observed:
"28...When the prosecution is not able to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt it cannot take advantage of the fact that the accused have not been able to probabilise their defence. It is well settled that the prosecution must stand or fall on its own feet. It cannot draw support from the weakness of the case of the accused, if it has not proved its case beyond reasonable doubt."
Non joining of Independent public persons during raid/ recovery:
37. The story of the prosecution as putforth by the Investigating Officer is that while he was on patrolling duty vide DD Ex.PW- 7/A alongwith Ct. Surender Singh and Ct. Sandeep, a secret informer came and informed them that one person is having possession of counterfeit currency notes which he intends to use in the market and if raid is conducted, he can be apprehended. The Investigating Officer SI Hawa Singh/PW-8 formed a raiding team consisting of himself, Ct. Surender Singh and Ct. Sandeep but despite request, no public persons joined the investigation. However, no notice stated to have been served on any passersby or the shopkeepers near the spot or the devotees visiting the Gurudwara, though the spot is stated to be Mangal Bazar Road, near Diler Mehndi Gurudwara and the time is 09:10 PM. Hence, it cannot be stated that it was a secluded place where public persons were not available at the FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.24 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar time when the raid was conducted, since it is admitted by PW-4 ASI Surender Singh (the then Ct. Surender Singh) that the place from where accused was apprehended i.e. Keeker Chowk is a busy place and public persons were present at the time when the accused was apprehended.
38. The manner in which the inquiry, seizure and search etc. was stated to be conducted on the spot at the time of arrest of the accused and alleged recovery of counterfeit currency notes makes the prosecution version highly doubtful. Record shows that PWs have deposed that the place of apprehension of accused and seizure of counterfeit currency notes was a public place but no public person was made as witness to join the investigation and no notices were given to the pubic persons who refused to join the investigation. It is evident from the testimonies of PWs that crime was committed at public place and that public persons were asked to join the investigation who did not agree still police officials neither served any notice upon them to initiate prosecution for refusal nor recorded their names or addresses to show that the police officials made bonafide efforts to persuade the public persons to join the investigation. It is apparent from the testimonies of PWs that all the proceedings regarding seizure and sealing of case property was done by police officials who were posted in the same police station and not by any independent witness which makes it highly probable that the entire proceeding were conducted at FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.25 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar the police station, that the case property was tampered with and that the alleged recovery was planted upon the accused at the police station.
39. Regarding the importance of joining independent witness during investigation in a case like the present one, reliance may be placed on the following case laws:-
(a) In case titled as Anoop Joshi Vs. State 1999(2) C.C. Cases 314 (HC), Hon'ble High Court of Delhi has observed as under:
"It is repeatedly laid down by this court that in such cases it should be shown by the police that sincere efforts have been made to join independent witnesses. In the present case, it is evident that no such sincere efforts have been made, particularly when we find that shops were open and one or two shopkeepers could have been persuaded to join the raiding party to witness the recovery being made from the appellant. In case any of the shopkeepers had declined to join the raiding party, the police could have later on taken legal action against such shopkeepers because they could not have escaped the rigorous of law while declining to perform their legal duty to assist the police in investigation as a citizen, which is an offence under the IPC".
(b) In case titled as Nanak Chand Vs. State of Delhi reported as DHC 1992 CRI LJ 55 , it is observed as under:-
"That the recovery is proved by three police officials who have differed on who snatched the Kirpan from the petitioner and at what time. The recovery was from a street with houses on both sides and shops nearby. And, yet no witness from the public has been produced. Not that in every case the police officials are to be treated as unworthy of reliance but their failure to join witnesses from the public especially when they are available at their elbow, may, as in the present case, cast doubt. They have again churned out a stereotyped version. Its rejection needs no Napoleon on the Bridge at Arcola".
40. Considering the aforesaid observations made by the Higher FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.26 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar Courts, the omissions /failure on the part of investigating agency to join independent public witnesses creates reasonable doubt in the prosecution story and are fatal to the prosecution version which establishes the defence version that there is total false implication of the accused in the present case and that the recovery was planted upon the accused.
DD entry regarding patrolling/departure only:
41. Further, the DD entry no. 60B proved on record by the prosecution is only regarding the patrolling departure by ASI Hawa Singh, Ct. Sandeep and Ct. Surender Singh in the said area where the offence alleged to have occurred however, it is not DD entry regarding information given to the police station about the secret information received by the Investigating Officer ASI Hawa Singh.
42. Even there is no DD entry regarding arrival of Investigating Officer SI Hawa Singh, Ct. Surender and Ct. Sandeep in the police station after apprehending and arrest of accused Raheesh with the counterfeit currency notes.
43. Regarding the value of making DD entry it is worth mentioning that as per Chapter 22 rule 49 of the Punjab Police Rules it is necessary to record DD Entry of arrival and departure of the police official. Chapter 22 Rule 49 of Punjab Police Rules, 1934, is reproduced as under :-
"Matters to be entered in Register No. II The following matters FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.27 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar shall, amongst others, be entered :-
"The hour of arrival and departure on duty at or from a police station of all enrolled police officers of whatever rank, whether posted at the police station or elsewhere, with a statement of the nature of their duty. This entry shall be made immediately on arrival or prior to the departure of the officer concerned and shall be attested by the latter personally by signature or seal. Note :- The term Police Station will include all places such as Police Lines and Police Posts where Register No. II is maintained."
44. At this juncture, it would be relevant to refer to a case law reported as Rattan Lal V/s State, 19872 (2) Crimes 29 the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, wherein it has been observed that :
"if the investigating agency deliberately ignores to comply with the provisions of the Act the court will have to approach their action with reservations. The matter has to be viewed with suspicion if the provisions of law are not strictly complied with and the least that can be said is that it is so done with an oblique motive. This failure to bring on record, the DD entries creates a reasonable doubt in the prosecution version and attributes oblique motive on the part of the prosecution."
45. Being guided by abovesaid case laws, it can be said that the search, seizure and recovery made by the above said police officials was in complete violation of the well established principles of law and the same can be said to be illegal which create grave doubts on the prosecution's version of recovery of alleged counterfeit currency notes from the possession of the accused from the spot and substantiates the defence version that the alleged recovery was planted upon the accused at the police station and that entire proceedings were recorded at the police FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.28 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar station and not on the spot.
Material contradictions regarding recovery:
46. Even doubt is casted upon recovery of the case property from the possession of accused in view of testimony of PW-4 ASI Surender Singh, who was member of raiding party and stated that only two bundles of fake currency notes were recovered from the pocket of pants of the accused Raheesh. Whereas, as per PW-6 Ct. Sandeep and PW-8 IO/SI Hawa Singh, four bundles of fake currency notes were recovered from the pockets of pants of the accused Raheesh. PW-4 ASI Surender Singh even failed to remember the number of pullandas prepared by the IO/PW-8 while seizing the counterfeit currency notes alleged to have recovered from the possession of accused Raheesh.
47. Even it is not explained by the Prosecution as to how and from where two mobile phones alongwith Rs.3,600/- were also recovered from the possession of accused Raheesh, if he was already carrying four bundles of counterfeit currency notes in both pockets of his pants.
48. In the Judgment titled as S.L.Goswami v. State of M.P reported as 1972 CRI.L.J.511(SC) the Hon'ble Supreme Court held:-
"...... In our view, the onus to proving all the ingredients of an offence is always upon the prosecution and at no stage does it shift to the accused. It is no part of the prosecution duty to FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.29 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar somehow hook the crook. Even in cases where the defence of the accused does not appear to be credible or is palpably false that burden does not become any the less. It is only when this burden is discharged that it will be for the accused to explain or controvert the essential elements in the prosecution case, which would negative it. It is not however for the accused even at the initial stage to prove something which has to be eliminated by the prosecution to establish the ingredients of the offence with which he is charged, and even if the onus shifts upon the accused and the accused has to establish his plea, the standard of proof is not the same as that which rests upon the prosecution..........................."
49. The onus and duty to prove the case against the accused is upon the prosecution and the prosecution must establish the charge beyond reasonable doubt. It is also a cardinal principle of criminal jurisprudence that if there is a reasonable doubt with regard to the guilt of the accused the accused is entitled to benefit of doubt resulting in acquittal of the accused. Reference may also be made to the judgment titled as Nallapati Sivaiah v. Sub Divisional Officer, Guntur reported as VIII(2007) SLT 454(SC).
Conclusion/findings :
50. In view of the abovesaid discussion and the Law cited above, as in a criminal trial the onus is on the prosecution to establish the guilt of the accused before the Court beyond the shadow of all reasonable doubts and in the present matter serious doubts have been casted upon the story of the prosecution as already discussed in detail in the preceding paragraphs.
FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.30 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar
51. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered opinion that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt with respect to the charge framed against accused Raheesh beyond reasonable doubts. Hence, accused Raheesh is acquitted of the charge against him under section 489B IPC and Section 489C IPC in present FIR bearing no. 142/2016, PS Nihal Vihar.
Digitally signed by SHEFALI SHEFALI BARNALA BARNALA TANDON ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN TANDON Date: 2024.08.13 16:05:00 +0530 COURT ON: 13.08.2024 (SHEFALI BARNALA TANDON) ASJ-05 (West), THC, Delhi
It is certified that this Judgment contains 31 pages and each page bears my signatures. Digitally signed by SHEFALI SHEFALI BARNALA BARNALA TANDON TANDON Date:
2024.08.13 16:05:11 +0530 (SHEFALI BARNALA TANDON) ASJ-05 (West), THC, Delhi 13.08.2024 FIR No. 142/2016 Page no.31 of 31 PS Nihal Vihar