Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Md. Sahajahan vs The State Of West Bengal on 8 December, 2017
Author: Joymalya Bagchi
Bench: Joymalya Bagchi
1
Item no. 9/Aloke
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Present :
The Hon'ble Justice Joymalya Bagchi
And
The Hon'ble Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj
C.R.A. 34 of 2010
with
C.R.R. 1792 of 2012
Md. Sahajahan
Versus
The State of West Bengal
For the Appellant : Mr. Siladitya Sanyal, ld. Adv.
Mr. Sujan Chatterjee, ld. Adv.
For the State : Mr. Arun Kr. Maiti, ld. Addl. P.P.
Ms. Zareen N. Khan, ld. Adv.
Heard on : 08.12.2017
Judgement on : 08.12.2017
Joymalya Bagchi, J.:
The appeal is directed against the judgement and order dated 31.07.2009 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track 3rd Court, Bichar Bhavan, Calcutta in Sessions Trial No. 7(6)-2008 arising out of Sessions Case No.31/2008 convicting the appellant for commission of offence punishable under Section 489B and 489C of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for eight years and to pay a fine 2 of Rs.5,000/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Section 489B of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing the appellant to suffer six years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to suffer six months for the offence punishable under Section 489C of the Indian Penal Code. Both the sentences to run concurrently.
The prosecution case, as alleged, against the appellant is to the effect that on 06.03.2008 S.I. Subrata Lahiri of New Market P.S. received reliable source information that one well built person aged about 35-40 years of dark complexion shall come near Hindustan Bar and Restaurant within New Market P.S. with huge amount of fake Indian currency notes (hereinafter referred to as 'FICNs') for selling the said counterfeit notes. He diarized such information. Thereafter, at around 16.15 hrs on that day he along with other police officers proceeded to the spot to work out the said information. The source led them in front of Hindustan Bar and Restaurant and they waited there. Around 16.50 hrs their source suddenly pointed out a dark complexioned, well built man aged about 35-40 years, wearing a lungi and shirt crossing the interception of Lindsay Street and J.L. N. Road from south to north. They intercepted the appellant. The appellant disclosed his identity as the appellant. Many people assembled there. They requested those persons to witness the search. Two of them agreed to witness the earch. In course of search of the appellant fifty pieces of notes of denomination Rs.500/- and five pieces of notes of denomination Rs.1000/- suspected to be fake were recovered from the possession of the appellant. The 3 appellant failed to given any satisfactory answer as to the possession of such currency notes suspected to be fake. Those currency notes were seized under a seizure list. The notes were also packed, labelled and signed by the witnesses as well as the appellant. Thereafter, the appellant along with seized notes were taken to New Market P.S. S.I., S.K. Mitra lodged written complaint at the police station and the appellant was arrested. On the complaint of S.I., New Market P.S. Case No. 65 dated 06.03.2008 was registered for investigation. The seized notes were sent for forensic examination. On receipt of report from Currency Notes Press, Government of India, Nasik Road, Nasik charge-sheet was filed against the appellant under the Section 489B/489C of the Indian Penal Code. Charges were framed under Sections 489B/489C of the Indian Penal Code against the appellant who pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The defence of the appellant was one of innocence and false implication.
In the course of trial the prosecution examined six witnesses. The defence examined three witnesses including himself who sought to be probabilized that the appellant owned a S.T.D. booth and had been falsely implicated in the instant case.
In conclusion of trial, the trial Judge by judgment and order dated 31.07.2009 convicted and sentence the appellant, as aforesaid. Hence, the present appeal. At the time of admission of appeal, Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the search and seizure had not been proved beyond 4 reasonable doubt. It is further submitted that the evidence of the defence witnesses were not considered in its proper prospective.
On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State submitted that the evidence of prosecution witnesses clearly established the seizure of Indian currency notes from the possession of the appellant. Report of the expert established that the seized currency notes were fake. Hence, no interference is called for.
I have considered the evidence in the light of the materials on record. P.W. 1 is the de facto complainant who is the leader of the raiding party. He has deposed that on the date of occurrence he led the police party who held raid in front of Hindustan Bar and Restaurant at the crossing of Lindsay Street and J.L. N. Road and apprehended the appellant. In course of seizure, fifty pieces of fake Indian currency notes denomination Rs.500/- each and five pieces of fake Indian currency notes of denomination Rs.1000/- were seized from the left side chest pocket of the shirt of the appellant. He has also proved the seizure list in the instant case. He also deposed that the seized currency notes were packed, sealed and labeled at the spot. The evidence of P.W. 1 is corroborated by P.W. 2, another member of the raiding party.
5
P.Ws. 3 and 4 are the independent witnesses who have also supported the prosecution case.
P.W. 5 is the Assistant Works Manager, Currency Note Press, Nasik Road, Nasik who has proved the expert report marked as exbt. 6 which shows that the seized notes were fake.
P.W. 6 is the investigating officer of the case.
The appellant had examined himself as D.W. 1 and claimed that there was an altercation between him and one Md. Sarif over non-payment of charges at his telephone booth. Hence, he has been falsely implicated in the instant case. He has sought to corroborate such version by examination of other defence witnesses who apart from claiming that the appellant owned a S.T.D. booth at 4A, Hide Lane, Caltutta-12 has not corroborated the plea of false implication of the appellant. Hence, the trial court rightly refused to rely on the defence plea of the appellant.
In view of the light of the aforesaid discussions, the conviction and sentence of the appellant is upheld. It appears that the appellant has served out the sentence in the meantime. A rule of enhancement of sentence is discharged. 6
Period of detention suffered by the appellant during investigation, enquiry and trial shall be set off from the substantive sentence imposed upon them in terms of 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.
Copy of the judgment along with LCR be sent down to the trial court at once for necessary compliance.
(Joymalya Bagchi, J.) I agree.
(Rajarshi Bharadwaj, J.) 7