Delhi District Court
State vs Manoj @ Upkar Luthra on 5 October, 2024
S.C. No.56033/2016 State Vs. Manoj @ Upkar Luthra
IN THE COURT OF SH. GAUTAM MANAN
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE- 09
WEST, TIS HAZARI COURTS, DELHI
In the matter of:
SC No. 56033/2016
CNR No. DLWT01-010793-2017
FIR No. 298/2013
Police Station Paschim VIhar
Under Section 235/240/243/174A/120-B
IPC
STATE
VERSUS
Manoj @ Upkar Luthra
S/o Late Sh. Raghubir Singh
R/o 533, Sector 11, Part I
HUDA, Panipat
Haryana ...Accused Persons
Date of institution 14.07.2017
Judgment reserved on 13.09.2024
Judgment Pronounced on 05.10.2024
Decision Convicted
JUDGMENT
1. Accused along with co-accused Randhir Mishra (since convicted) is facing trial in the present case on allegations that in pursuant to common design of criminal conspiracy, he hatched a conspiracy to counterfeit Indian currency coins and was found in possession of same.
Judgment Page 1 of 24S.C. No.56033/2016 State Vs. Manoj @ Upkar Luthra Brief Facts
2. On 10.10.2013 at about 04:00 PM, HC Ajay Kumar (PW2) produced a secret informer before SI Naveen Kumar (PW7) who gave an information about delivery of counterfeit coins by accused Manoj @ Upkar at about 5-6 PM at Paschim Vihar West to co-accused Randhir Mishra.
3. SI Naveen prepared a raiding party consisting of HC Ajay Kumar, HC Dilbagh Singh (PW5), HC Parveen Kumar, Ct.Sanjeev and Ct.Sudama along with secret informer and all of them proceeded for the Paschim Vihar West Metro Station in a private vehicle. At about 05:15 PM, accused Randhir Mishra alighted from an Auto and started waiting on the service road. At about 05:35 PM, a white color Santro Car came. Accused Manoj @ Upkar alighted from the car and started talking to accused Randhir Mishra.
4. Thereafter, accused Manoj took out a sack from the back seat of the car and gave to accused Randhir Mishra and when he was taking another sack from the Car and was proceeding to deliver the same to accused Randhir Mishra, both accused persons were apprehended by raiding party.
5. SI Naveen Kumar apprehended accused Manoj @ Upkar.
HC Ajay and Ct.Sanjeev apprehended accused Randhir Mishra. SI Naveen Kumar has checked both the sacks which were filled with coins of Rs.5/- denomination which were appearing to be Counterfeit coins.
Judgment Page 2 of 24S.C. No.56033/2016 State Vs. Manoj @ Upkar Luthra
6. 5000 coins were recovered from the sack which was recovered from the possession of accused Manoj @ Upkar. 4700 coins were recovered from the sack which was recovered from the possession of accused Randhir Mishra. Coins were seized and sealed with the seal of NK in pullandas. White colour Santro Car was also seized. On the seizure, FIR No.298/13, PS Paschim Vihar, under Section 240/243/34 IPC was registered and investigation was carried out. Accused persons were arrested.
7. During investigation, site plan of place of recovery was prepared. Both the accused persons made disclosure statements in which accused Manoj @ Upkar made disclosure statement that he was indulged in manufacturing of counterfeit coins. Accused Manoj got recovered a Hydraulic Machine, Dye and raw material from Factory No. 1320, Rai Indl. Area, Sonipat. The same were sealed and seized by the IO.
8. During investigation, statement of Sh. Dharmender Singh (PW4), owner of factory was recorded. Statement of owner of white colour Santro Car was also recorded. Counterfeit coins and raw material were sent to India Government Mint - SPMCIL, Shahid Bhagat Singh Road, Fort, Hutatma Chowk, Mumbai for examination. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet under Section 235/240/243/34 IPC was filed against both the accused persons.
Judgment Page 3 of 24S.C. No.56033/2016 State Vs. Manoj @ Upkar Luthra
9. Accused Manoj Kumar @ Upkar was declared proclaimed offender vide orders dated 01.10.2014 and the case against co-accused Randhir Mishra was proceeded.
10.Vide orders dated 11.01.2017, accused Randhir Mishra was convicted for the offence punishable under Section U/s 243 IPC read with Section 120B IPC.
Charge
11.Accused was arrested in some other case and upon production warrants, he was produced before this Court. Vide order dated 28.08.2018, charge for offence punishable under Section 240/120B/240/235(II) & 174A IPC was framed against accused Manoj @ Upkar. Accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
Prosecution Evidence
12. Prosecution examined 8 witnesses.
PW NAME NATURE DEPOSITION 1 ASI Madan Lal Duty Officer Proved FIR as Ex PW1/A, his endorsement on rukka as Ex PW1/B and certificate under Section 65 (B) IE Act in respect of computerized record of FIR as Ex PW1/C. 2 SI Ajay Kumar Member of Deposed in respect of raiding team apprehension of accused persons with counterfeit coins (Ex P-7 & Ex. P-8) which were seized vide memo as Ex PW2/A & B, preparation of site plan Ex Judgment Page 4 of 24 S.C. No.56033/2016 State Vs. Manoj @ Upkar Luthra PW7/B, arrest of accused persons, their personal search and disclosure statements as Ex PW2/D to I, seizure of hydraulic machine, a power pack machine (Ex PW2/P-1 & P-
2), dye having mirror image of 'Ashok Emblem 2007 (Ex PW2/P-3), two iron piece of dye (Ex PW2/P-4 & 5), 1736 pieces (Ex P-6) meant to counterfeit coins and a plastic container Ex P-7 vide memo Ex PW2/K. 3 Gaurav Owner of Deposed that on the date of Goswami Santro Car incident he gave his Santo Car HR-10S-0882 (Ex PW3/P-1) to accused Manoj. He proved his reply Ex PW3/A to notice under section 133 MV Act, RC of his car as Ex PW3/B and superdarinama as Ex PW3/C. 4 Dharmender Owner of Deposed that he let out his Singh factory(place of factory to one Ashok recovery of machine) 5 ASI Dilbag Member of Deposed on similar lines of Singh raiding team PW2.
6 ASI Balram MHC(M) Proved deposit of case property with Malkhana vide entries Ex PW6/A to C. 7 Inspector Member of Deposed on similar lines of Naveen Kumar raiding team PW2. Proved hydraulic machine and a power pack machine (Ex. P-21 & P-22) 8 ASI Rajender Police Proved report from India Singh Govt. Mint in respect seized coins as Ex PX.
Judgment Page 5 of 24S.C. No.56033/2016 State Vs. Manoj @ Upkar Luthra Plea of Accused
13.In his statement recorded under Section 313 CrPC, accused stated that he has been falsely implicated because earlier he was involved in another case of similar nature in the year 1999. Accused stated that case properties were planted upon him as nothing was recovered from his possession at any point of time. Accused further stated that he does have any knowledge about co-accused Randhir Mishra.
Defense Evidence
14.Accused examined DW1 Karan Verma who deposed that accused Manoj @ Upkar Luthra is his cousin. On 08.10.2013, he came to Delhi to meet accused. While they were present at Kashmere Gate Bus Stand near the juice shop, 4-5 persons came there and took away accused with them and he was also taken to PS Paschim Vihar. They made him to sit in the PS for about 2-3 hours and thereafter he was allowed to go, whereas, accused was detained in said PS. After 3-4 days, he came to know that accused was arrested in this case.
Arguments
15.Sh. Pankaj Bhatia Ld Addl. PP for State submitted that police witnesses PW2 SI Ajay Kumar, PW5 ASI Dilbagh Singh & PW7 Inspector Naveen Kumar who conducted the raid and apprehended accused persons with counterfeit coins and recovered hydraulic machine at instance of Judgment Page 6 of 24 S.C. No.56033/2016 State Vs. Manoj @ Upkar Luthra accused Manoj have supported the case of prosecution. It is argued that all of them have withstood the test of cross- examination and have proved seizure of counterfeit currency from possession of accused Manoj @ Upkar. It is submitted that case of prosecution stands proved beyond reasonable doubt, therefore, accused persons are liable to be convicted.
16. On the other hand, Sh. Sanjeev Kumar, Ld. Defence Counsel submitted that accused that accused Manoj is falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that no public witness has been examined by the police at the time of apprehension of the accused persons, as joining of public witness by the police officials was mandatory in view of the allegation that police officials were having secret information and it was not the chance recovery.
17.It is submitted that there are material contradictions in the testimony of members of raiding team in respect of direction from which the accused Randhir came and also the color of Auto rickshaw. It is submitted that PW5 ASI Dilbagh Singh stated that Manoj spoke to co-accused Randhir Mishra for about 2-3 Seconds whereas PW7 SI Naveen Kumar deposed that accused Manoj Kumar talked to accused Randhir Mishra for about 3-4 minutes. It is submitted that there is variation in the testimony of members of raiding team qua the location and presence of public persons near the place of recovery. Defence has also contended that the members of raiding team have given Judgment Page 7 of 24 S.C. No.56033/2016 State Vs. Manoj @ Upkar Luthra different time duration in respect of counting of the coins at the place of recovery. It is argued that in view of the material contradictions and variations in the position of members of raiding team the recovery of the counterfeit coins as well as of the hydraulic machine is in the cloud and dents the case. Thus, it is argued that the accused Manoj is entitled to be acquitted in the present case.
18. I have heard Ld. Addl. PP for State and Ld. defense counsel at length. I have perused the material on record.
Appreciation of Evidence and Analysis
19.Allegations against accused Manoj are threefold. The first allegation is that on 10.10.2013 at about 5:40 PM he was found in possession of 5000 counterfeit Indian coins in denomination of ₹ 5 each.
20.Second allegation is that on 12.10.2013 accused Manoj got recovered hydraulic machine along with the other necessary equipment which were used for counterfeiting the Indian currency coins.
21.Another allegation appearing against the accused is that he concealed himself from the process of law and was declared a proclaimed offender vide order dated 01.10.2014 and committed an offence punishable under Section 174-A IPC.
Judgment Page 8 of 24S.C. No.56033/2016 State Vs. Manoj @ Upkar Luthra
22.In order to bring home the guilt of the accused persons, prosecution examined PW2 SI Ajay Kumar, PW5 ASI Dilbagh Singh and PW7 Inspector Naveen Kumar.
23.Recovery on 10.10.2013: Let us examine what the police witnesses have deposed in respect of recovery of counterfeit coins from the possession of accused Manoj on 10.10.2013.
24.Relevant part of examination-in-chief of PW2 SI Ajay Kumar reads as under:
"On 10 10.2013, I was posted at AATS West District, Paschim Vihar, Delhi. On that day at about 04.00 PM, I received a secret information through secret informer to the effect that one person namely Manoj would come near Paschim Vihar West Metro Station at about 5-6 PM to deliver counterfeit coins to a person and, if raid is conducted, he could be apprehended. The said informer was produced by me before SI Naveen, who also confirmed the above-mentioned secret information.
Thereafter, SI Naveen conveyed the said information to senior officer. The senior officer gave the directions for conducting raid. Thereafter, SI Naveen constituted a raiding team consisting of myself, HC Dilbag, HC Parveen, Ct. Sanjeev, SI Naveen and Ct. Sudama.
All the raiding team members left the office for the spot in a white colour Scorpio vehicle. On reaching near Paschim Vihar West Metro Station, SI Naveen made request Judgment Page 9 of 24 S.C. No.56033/2016 State Vs. Manoj @ Upkar Luthra to 4-5 passersby to join the investigation, but none agreed and they left the spot without disclosing their identity.
SI Naveen briefed the raiding team to take their position and we were deployed by him nearby the spot on service lane. At about 05.15 PM, a TSR came there from the side of Punjab Bagh and one boy stepped down from the same and thereafter, the aforesaid TSR went away from there. The boy, who de-boarded from the TSR was identified by the secret informer as Randhir Mishra After getting down from the TSR, Randhir Mishra started waiting for someone. At about 05.35 PM, one Santro Car of white colour bearing no. HR-10S-0882 came there from the side of Punjabi Bagh. Randhir Mishra started talking with the driver of the abovesaid Santro Car and then, the secret informer pointed out towards the said driver while stating that he was Manoj i.e. the accused, who is present in the Court today (correctly identified). After having some conversation with Randhir Mishra, accused Manoj came out from the vehicle and handed over a bag to Randhir Mishra after picking the same from the back seat of his santro car. One another bag was taken out from the said santro car by accused Upkar @ Manoj Luthra who is present in the Court today (correctly identified) and same was handed over to accused Randhir Mishra (already convicted). In the meantime, the secret informer was pointed out towards both the accused persons and left the spot. The present accused was apprehended by SI Navin Kumar and convict Randhir Mishra was apprehended by me with the help of other staff. Thereafter, SI Navin Kumar checked the sacks which were recovered from the accused persons and found Indian coins in the denomination of Rs. 5/- IO sent Judgment Page 10 of 24 S.C. No.56033/2016 State Vs. Manoj @ Upkar Luthra me to the local market for bringing plastic jar. I returned to the spot within 20 minutes with six plastic jars and the same were handed over to SI Naveen. SI Naveen checked plastic sacks recovered from the possession of accused and counted the coins with the help of staff and it was found total 5,000 coins in number in the denomination of Rs.5/-. The coins were kept in two plastic jars, 2,500 in each jar. Both the jars were wrapped with doctor tape and sealed with the seal of NK and same were marked as S-1 and S-2. The bag in which the counterfeit coins were kept by the accused persons and the rope with which it was tied, were kept in a cloth pulanda and sealed with the seal of NK and marked as E-1.
Thereafter, SI Naveen checked another plastic sacks recovered from the possession of convict Randhir Mishra and counted the coins with the help of staff and it was found total 4700 coins in number in the denomination of Rs.5/- The coins were kept in two plastic jars, 2,500 in one plastic jar and 2200 in another jar. Both the jars were wrapped with doctor tape and sealed with the seal of NK and same were marked as S-3 and S-4. The bag in which the counterfeit coins were kept by the convict and the rope with which it was tied, were kept in a cloth pullanda and sealed with the seal of NK and marked as E-2. After use, the seal was handed over to me by the IO...."
25.PW5 ASI Dilbagh Singh deposed as under:
" .............. At about 5.35 PM, one white colour santro car bearing registration No. HR 10 C-0882 came from the side of Judgment Page 11 of 24 S.C. No.56033/2016 State Vs. Manoj @ Upkar Luthra Punjabi Bagh and stopped on service road near metro station, Paschim Vihar West. There was only one person in the car who was driving the same. After stopping the car, he got down from the car and moved towards the place where Randhir Mishra was standing. The secret informer pointed towards that person and identified him as Manoj Upkar. Manoj Upkar and Randhir Mishra talked for about one minute and thereafter, Manoj Upkar moved towards his car, opened the left side rear gate of his car and took out one sack from the car and handed over the same to Randhir Mishra. When he again moved towards his car and took out another sack from his car, then he as well as Randhir Mishra were apprehended by our raiding team. Mnaoj Upkar was apprehended by SI Naveen and HC Praveen and Randhir Mishra was apprehended by HC Ajay and Const. Sanjeev.
I identify accused Manoj Upkar, who is present in the Court today (correctly identified).
IO interrogated accused Manoj Upkar and Randhir Mishra who disclosed their same names which were informed to us by the secret informer. Both the sacks were tied with rope. Same were opened which were found containing coins in the denomination of Rs. 5/-. These coins were appearing counterfeit by their colour and by appearance. HC Ajay was sent to market for bringing plastic transparent jars. IO requested 4-5 passersby to join the proceedings but none agreed and they went without disclosing their identity. After sometime, HC Ajay returned to the spot with four plastic transparent jars. The coins were counted which were lying in both the sacks. The sack which was in the possession of Judgment Page 12 of 24 S.C. No.56033/2016 State Vs. Manoj @ Upkar Luthra accused Manoj Upkar which he took out from his car after delivering the first sack to Randhir Mishra, was found to contain 5000 counterfeit coins in the denomination of Rs. 5/-. The sack which was in possession of Randhir Mishra, was found to contain 4700 counterfeit coins in the denomination of Rs. 5/-. The 5000 coins which were recovered from the sack from the possession of accused Manoj Upkar, were kept in two plastic jars. 2500 coins were kept in each of the jar. Serial No. 1 and 2 were given to these jars.The 4700 coins which were recovered from the sack which was found in possession of Randhir Mishra, were also kept in two plastic jars i.e. in one jar 2500 coins were kept and in other jar, 2200 coins were kept. Serial Nos. 3 and 4 were given to these jars. All the four jars were sealed with the seal of NK. Two separate parcels were prepared of the empty sacks and rope and same were also sealed with the seal of NK and same were provided serial No. E-1 (recovered from Manoj Upkar) and E-2 (recovered from Randhir Mishra). These sealed jars and the parcels containing sacks and rope were seized vide two seizure memos Ex. PW2/A and Ex. PW2/B, bearing my signatures at points B. The seal after use, was handed over to HC Ajay by IO after its use. The santro car from which accused Manoj Upkar came to the spot, was also seized vide memo Ex. PW2/C, bearing my signatures at point B."
26.Testimony of PW7 Inspector Naveen Kumar in respect of recovery of counterfeit coins reads as under:
"...... At about 05:15 PM. one person de- boarded a TSR which came on the side of Punjabi Bagh. Secret informer pointed towards that person and identified him as Randhir Mishra (already convicted). Randhir Judgment Page 13 of 24 S.C. No.56033/2016 State Vs. Manoj @ Upkar Luthra Mishra stood in the service lane and started waiting for other associate.
At about 05:35 PM. one white colour Santro Car came in the service lane from the side of Punjabi Bagh and stopped there. One person came out of the Santro Car who was pointed out towards informer and was identified as Manoj @ Upkar. Thereafter, secret informer left the spot.
I identified accused Manoj @ Upkar, present in the court today (correctly identified).
Accused Manoj @ Upkar talked to Randhir Mishra. Then, accused Manoj Upkar moved towards his Santro Car and took out one Sack from the Car and again came towards Randhir Mishra and gave the Sack to him:
Accused Manoj @ Upkar again moved towards his Santro Car and removed another Sack from the Car. He started moving with the Sack towards Randhir Mishra, in the meantime, I alongwith HC Parveen Kumar apprehended accused Manoj @ Upkar with the Sack. HC Ajay and Ct.Sanjeev apprehended convict Randhir Mishra with the Sack.
I interrogated accused Manoj @ Upkar as well as convict Randhir Mishra who disclosed their names as above. I checked both the Sacks and found same were contained Coins in the denomination of Rs.5/- and were appearing counterfeit.
On interrogation, accused Manoj @ Upkar disclosed that he had come there to give supply of counterfeit coins to Randhir Mishra. I sent HC Ajay for arranging Containers/Jars. After some time. HC Ajay returned to the spot with approx. six plastie Judgment Page 14 of 24 S.C. No.56033/2016 State Vs. Manoj @ Upkar Luthra Jars.
The coins lying in the Sack recovered from accused Manoj @ Upkar were counted and same found to be 5000 coins. 2,500 coins were kept in one plastic Jar and remaining 2.500 coins were kept in another plastic Jar.
Both the plastic Jars were tied with doctor tap. The empty plastic sack and the rope/सूतली with which the sack was initially tied were converted into a cloth parcel. The two plastic Jars were provided sl.nos. S.1 and S.2 and both the Jars were sealed with the seal of NK and seized vide seizure memo Ex. PW-2/A (already exhibited), bearing my signatures at point C. The coins lying in the Sack recovered from convict Randhir Mishra were counted and same found to be 4700 coins. 2.500 coins were kept in one plastic Jar and remaining 2.200 coins were kept in another plastic Jar. Both the plastic Jars were tied with doctor tap. The empty plastic sack and the rope/सूतली with which the sack was initially tied were converted into a cloth parcel. The two plastic Jars were provided sl.nos. S.3 and S.4 and both the Jars were sealed with the seal of NK and seized vide seizure memo Ex.PW-2/B (already exhibited), bearing my signatures at point C......"
27.Defense has contended that testimony of recovery witnesses are not reliable as all the members of raiding team have given different directions from which accused Randhir came at the spot. It is pointed out that PW2 SI Ajay Kumar deposed that co-accused Randhir came from the Peeragarhi whereas PW5 ASI Dilbagh Singh deposed that accused Randhir came from the Punjabi Bagh side and Judgment Page 15 of 24 S.C. No.56033/2016 State Vs. Manoj @ Upkar Luthra PW7 Inspector Naveen Kumar also deposed that accused came from the Punjabi Bagh side.
28.PW2, PW5 & PW7 all of them deposed that accused Randhir Mishra came in an auto rickshaw and he alighted at Paschim Vihar Metro Station. All of them in unison deposed that accused Randhir alighted from the TCR and waited for somebody. Both PW5 ASI Dilbagh Singh and PW7 Inspector Naveen Kumar stated that accused Randhir Mishra came from Punjabi Bagh side and no clarification is sought from this witness, that if a person is coming from Punjabi Bagh side towards Peeragarhi then to approach the Service Road, he would require to take U- turn or not. Thus, this variation in the deposition of PW2 does not go to the root of the matter.
29.Defence counsel contends that PW5 ASI Dilbagh Singh deposed that Auto rickshaw in which accused Randhir came was grey and yellow in colour but the grey and yellow colour TCRs do not ply in Delhi. However, this contention of the learned counsel for the accused has no merits at all as the other recovery witnesses were not asked about the colour of the Auto Rickshaw. There is no discrepancy in the depositions of recovery witnesses as to the colour of auto rickshaw. Moreover, nothing has been brought on record by the accused to prove that these color autos do not ply in Delhi.
Judgment Page 16 of 24S.C. No.56033/2016 State Vs. Manoj @ Upkar Luthra
30.It is also contended by defense that though PW5 ASI Dilbagh Singh deposed that Manoj spoke to accused Randhir Mishra just for about 2-3 Seconds whereas PW7 Inspector Naveen Kumar deposed that accused Manoj Kumar talked to accused Randhir Mishra for about 3-4 minutes. Prosecution has set up a case that co-accused Randhir came at the spot to collect the coins from the accused Manoj. All the members of raiding team deposed to the fact that both of them had a conversation between them. The important fact here is that both the accused persons met with each other and had a conversation. In these facts, little variance in the deposition of recovery witnesses in respect of duration of the conversation between accused persons which may not be lasted beyond few minutes before they were apprehended does not dent the case of prosecution in any manner.
31.Other contention of ld. Defence Counsel is that all the recovery witnesses have given different description of the place of recovery. After careful scrutiny of the deposition of recovery witnesses can be seen that all of them have deposed that near the place of recovery there were some shops though there is little variation in their testimony in respect of the distance between the place of recovery in the shops but the fact is all of them have described that near the place of recovery some shops were existing.
32.Defence also contended about non joining of independent witnesses at the time of recovery of counterfeit coins. It is Judgment Page 17 of 24 S.C. No.56033/2016 State Vs. Manoj @ Upkar Luthra contended that though the raiding team was near metro station but no effort was made by the members of raiding team to join any independent witness despite availability. It is submitted that recovery proceedings were neither photographed or videographed and the said recovery in the absence of any independent witness is under cloud and the same cannot be relied upon.
33.PW2 SI Ajay Kumar, PW5 ASI Dilbagh Singh and PW7 Inspector SI Naveen Kumar in unison deposed that on receiving secret information a raiding party was formed. All three of them deposed that at about 05:15 PM, accused Randhir Mishra came in TCR and started waiting for somebody. At about 5:30 PM, accused Manoj came in a white colour Santro Car and stopped it on the Service Road.
34.It is also deposed that there was some conversation between both the accused persons. Accused Manoj @ Upkar lifted a bag (sack) from the rear seat of Car and gave it to accused Randhir and thereafter, accused Manoj again went to the Car and took out another Sack from there and in the meanwhile, members of the raiding party come in action and both the accused persons were apprehended.
35.All recovery witnesses have withstood the test of cross-
examination. Nothing fruitful was extracted during the their cross-examinations to discredit veracity of their statements. All the abovesaid witnesses have categorically Judgment Page 18 of 24 S.C. No.56033/2016 State Vs. Manoj @ Upkar Luthra stated that accused Manoj @ Upkar was apprehended by Inspector Naveen Kumar and SI Praveen and accused Randhir Mishra was arrested by SI Ajay Kumar and Ct. Sanjeev. It is also deposed by all witnesses that 4700 coins were recovered from bag which was in the hand of accused Randhir Mishra and 5000 coins were recovered from the bag which was in the hand of accused Manoj @ Upkar.
36. All police recovery witnesses (PW2, PW5 & PW17) have deposed in unison in respect of the recovery of counterfeit coins from possession of accused Manoj. No material contradictions has cropped up in their testimony. No motive is attributed to them as to why they would plant the case property on the accused.
37. In "Sathyan Versus State of Kerala" 2023 SCC OnLine SC 986, Hon'ble Apex Court held as under:
25. Recently, this Court in Mohd. Naushad v.
State (NCT of Delhi) had observed that the testimonies of police witnesses, as well as pointing out memos do not stand vitiated due to the absence of independent witnesses.
26. It is clear from the above propositions of law, as reproduced and referred to, that the testimonies of official witnesses can nay be discarded simply because independent witnesses were not examined. The correctness or authenticity is only to be doubted on "any good reason" which, quite apparently is missing from the present case. No reason is forthcoming on behalf of the Appellant to challenge the veracity of the testimonies of PW - 1 and PW - 2, which the courts below have found absolutely to be inspiring in confidence. Therefore, basing the conviction on the basis of testimony of the police witnesses as undertaken by the trial court and is confirmed by the High Court vide the impugned judgment, cannot be faulted with.
Judgment Page 19 of 24S.C. No.56033/2016 State Vs. Manoj @ Upkar Luthra
38. There is no material on record which could enable this court to disbelief deposition of police witnesses in respect of the recovery affected from the accused. Their deposition is inspiring confidence. It has also been explained by recovery witnesses that none of the public persons agreed to join investigation.
39.Accused Manoj @ Upkar came in white colour Santro Car bearing no. HR-10S-0882 (Ex PW3/P-1). PW3 Gaurav Goswami, owner of the said car deposed that accused Manoj @ Upkar had taken the car from him on 09.10.2013 on the pretext of transporting his child to the hospital. Nothing is attributed in his cross-examination as why he would depose falsely against the accused. In the light of testimony of PW3, it also stands proved that accused was having possession of car HR-10S-0882 in which coins were transported.
40.Accused took a defence he was picked up from Kashmiri Gate Metro Station by police officials and implicated in this case.
41.In this regard DW1 Karan deposed that on 08.10.2013, his cousin Manoj (accused) came to receive at him at Kashmiri Gate, Bus Stand and from where 4-5 persons came there and took away accused Manoj with them. He was also taken to PS Paschim Vihar. DW1 was made to sit in the police station for about 2-3 hours and he was Judgment Page 20 of 24 S.C. No.56033/2016 State Vs. Manoj @ Upkar Luthra allowed to go whereas, accused Manoj was detained. After 3-4 days, DW1 came to know that Manoj was arrested in this case.
42.However, in his cross-examination DW1 Karan deposed that he did not approach any Senior Police Official in respect of his claim that he along with accused were lifted from Kashmere Gate Bus Stand. He did not file any complaint before the Court in this regard.
43.DW1 Karan deposed that he was released by the police officials of PS Paschim Vihar after 3-4 hours of his detention and in such a case, Karan had every opportunity to take appropriate recourse to safeguard the interest of accused Manoj rather testimony of Karan is that after 3-4 days of this incident he came to know about the arrest of accused. DW1 did not explain any reason for not making any effort to get his cousin accused Manoj released from his wrongful confinement. His unusual conduct of not making an effort to get his cousin released does not appeal to the senses. Therefore, the deposition of DW1 that he along with accused were apprehended at Kashmiri Gate bus stand by the police officials is hardly believable and is not worthy of any credence.
44.PW8 HC Rajender Singh has duly proved the report of India Govt. Mint dated 19.05.2014 as Ex. PX (Colly.) before the Court at per which the recovered coins are found to be counterfeit coins.
Judgment Page 21 of 24S.C. No.56033/2016 State Vs. Manoj @ Upkar Luthra
45.In light of above discussions, deposition of PW2,5 & 7 is found trustworthy and believable. Their trustworthy evidence, leads to conclusion that 5000 counterfeit coins were recovered by aforesaid police witnesses from possession of accused Manoj. However, there is no evidence that accused Manoj entered into any criminal conspiracy with intention that fraud would be committed with these counterfeit coins.
46.Recovery on 12.10.2013: Case of the prosecution is that following apprehension of accused Manoj, his three day police custody was taken. Pursuant to his supplementary disclosure statement, accused Manoj led police team to Plot No. 1320, Rai Industrial Area, Sonepat, Haryana and from there at the instance of accused Manoj, one hydraulic machine (Ex P-21), one power pack machine, one dye having mirror image of 'Ashok Emblem 2007', (Ex PW2/P-3, 4 & 5) two iron piece of dye and one sack of raw material ie. 1736 iron pieces (Ex P-6) meant for counterfeit coin were recovered from the room of the said factory which was seized vide memo Ex. PW2/K.
47.Though recovery witnesses claim that above equipment were seized from the factory but there is no evidence on record that said factory was in possession of accused Manoj. PW4 Dharmender Singh who is owner of the said premises in his deposition failed to identify the accused as the person to whom that premises was rented out. No rent agreement has been brought on record to establish the Judgment Page 22 of 24 S.C. No.56033/2016 State Vs. Manoj @ Upkar Luthra possession of accused over the premises recovery of equipment has been effected and in absence of any such proof the recovery of above equipment cannot be connected to accused Manoj.
48. Allegations under Section 174A IPC: It is matter of record that accused Manoj was declared proclaimed offender. However, record reflects that he was in custody in case FIR No. 57/16 PS Special Cell and thus, he could not appear in the present proceedings. Therefore, it is not the case here that accused willfully absented himself or concealed himself from the process of law, and as such accused is not liable to be convicted for the offence punishable under Section 174A IPC.
Conclusion:
49. In the light of above said discussions, charge against accused for possessing the equipment to counterfeit Indian currency has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt and hence, accused acquitted for offence punishable under section 235 Part II IPC. Accused is also acquitted for the offence punishable interception 174-A IPC.
50. It is concluded that accused was found in possession of 5000 counterfeit ₹5 Indian currency coins and thus, he is held guilty for committing an offence punishable under section 240 IPC.
Judgment Page 23 of 24S.C. No.56033/2016 State Vs. Manoj @ Upkar Luthra Matter be listed for hearing submissions on quantum of sentence on 07.11.2024.
Digitally signed Announced in the open court on 5th October, 2024 GAUTAM by GAUTAM MANAN Date: MANAN 2024.10.05 18:07:38 +0530 (Gautam Manan) Addl. Sessions Judge-09/West, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi Judgment Page 24 of 24