Delhi District Court
State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors Fir ... on 25 February, 2012
1
IN THE COURT OF SH. SANJEEV KUMAR
ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGEI(OUTER): ROHINI COURTS: DELHI
I.D. NO.02401R5791722004.
SC No.134/11.
FIR No. 669/04.
PS UTTAM NAGAR.
U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC
STATE VERSUS
1. PRAVEEN @ KALIYA S/O. GULSHAN KUMAR
R/O. M1, GALI NO.21, MAHAVIR ENCLAVE,
PARTII, DABRI, DELHI.
2. SUNNY S/O. RAJA RAM, R/O. C586, MAHAVIR
ENCLAVE, PARTIII, DELHI.
3. BUDHI NATH S/O. YADUVANSHI
R/O. RZA16, SITAPURI, PARTI, DELHI.
4. BHANU PRATAP S/O. SHRI NAYAK
R/O. RZA30, SITAPURI, DABRI, DELHI.
PERMANENT ADDRESS:
VILLAGERAJNIT PUR, DONARI, PS
BANDISHWAR, DISTRICT RAI BARIELLEY,
U.P.
State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC
2
Date of Institution in the Sessions Court : 22.05.2006
Date of Arguments: 06.02.2012
Date of Judgment : 21.02.2012
JUDGEMENT:
1. In brief the prosecution story are that on 08.08.2004 Shri Raj Singh Baliyan was running a shop in the name and style of Arya Medical Store at C7, Chanakya Place, 40 Foot Road, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi, and at about 8.30 p.m. that, one person came to his shop and gave him currency note of Rs.500/ and asked for the change of the same, and when he checked the said currency note under the U.V. light, installed in his shop, he found the said currency note counterfeit and then told to the said person that note is counterfeit. In the meanwhile ASI Raj Singh passing through there with his team for investigations in some other casereached there, he handed over the said person namely accused Praveen @ Kaliya to him. On the search of the accused, 19 other counterfeit currency notes in the denomination of Rs.500/ each recovered. State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 3 ASI Raj Singh recorded statement of complainant Raj Singh Baliyan, on the basis of which FIR No.669/04 registered in PSUttam Nagar. Accused was arrested and on his disclosure statement, other coaccused person namely Buddhi Nath, Bhanu Pratap and Sunny were arrested and from their possession also counterfeit currency notes 210, 40 and 20 respectively in the denomination of Rs.500/ each were also recovered. After completion of investigation chargesheet was filed u/s. 420/489B/489 C/34 IPC
2. Since the case was triable by the Court of Sessions, therefore, after compliance of the provisions u/s. 207 Cr.P.C, the case was committed to the court of Sessions by ld. MM. Ld. Sessions Judge assigned to this court for trial.
3. Charges for offence punishable u/s. 489B/489C/420 read with 511 IPC framed against accused Praveen @ Kaliya, while charge u/s. 489CIPC framed against other three accused persons namely Bhanu State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 4 Pratap, Budhi Nath and Sunny.
4. In order to prove its case, prosecution examined six (6) witnesses. PW1 is HC Banwari Lal, MHC(M) of PSUttam Nagar, proved the entry for depositing of the case properties in the malkhana as Ex.PW1/A and Ex.PW1/B and Road Certificate regarding sending the case property to Security Press, Nasik Road, Nasik as Ex.PW1/C. PW2 ASI Bal Kishan duty officer, proved the FIR Ex.PW2/A. PW3 is the complainant Rajbir Singh Balyan, PW4 Ct. Anil has deposed that he was with the IO ASI Raj Singh when the complainant handed over the accused Praveen @ Kaliya to ASI, he took the rukka to the PS and got the FIR registered. PW5 Ct. Prahlad Singh is the witness of arrest of accused persons Sunny, Bhanu Pratap and Budhi Nath and recovery of counterfeit currency notes from them. He proved the seizure memo of recovery of 20 notes from accused Sunny as Ex.PW5/A, disclosure statement of accused as Ex.PW5/B, personal search of accused Sunny Ex.PW5/C and seizure State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 5 memo of recovery of 40 counterfeit currency notes seized from the possession of accused Bhanu Pratap as Ex.PW5/D. He has also proved arrest memo of accused Bhanu Pratap Ex.PW5/E, personal search memo Ex.PW5/F, disclosure statement of the said accused Ex.PW5/G and also proved arrest memo of accused Budhi Nath Ex.PW5/H, personal search memo Ex.PW5/J and recovery of 210 counterfeit currency notes in the denomination of Rs.500/ from the possession of accused Budhi Nath as Ex.PW5/K. PW6 ASI Raj Singh is the IO. He also proved the report of Security Press, Nashik Road, Nashik as Ex.PW6/X1.
5. After the conclusion of the prosecution evidence, statement of accused persons u/s. 313 Cr.P.C. recorded, in which all the incriminating evidence put to them and they pleaded their innocence and denied all the incriminating evidence. However, they did not lead evidence in their defence.
6. Arguments heard from Shri Sukhbeer Singh, ld. Addl. State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 6 PP for the State, Shri Chander Maini ld. Counsel for accused Sunny and Shri Bhanu Pratap Singh, ld. Counsel for accused persons Bhanu Pratap, Buddhi Nath and Praveen Kaliya.
7. As stated above the brief fact of the prosecution is that, accused Parveen @ Kaliya was apprehended on the complaint of PW2 Shri Raj Singh Balyan, while he has given Rs.500/ currency note for change, which was found counterfeit currency note and later on, on his disclosure statement other three coaccused persons were also arrested and were found in possession of counterfeit currency notes. Hence, the star witness of the prosecution is PW3 Raj Singh Baliyan.
8. PW3 Raj Singh Baliyan deposed that on 8.8.2004 he was sitting at Arya Medical Store, there at about 8.30 p.m. one boy came to his shop and gave him one currency note of Rs.500/ for getting change (Khulla Karne Ke Liye) and on checking under the U.V. Light the said note was found not genuine, as the same was not reflecting the colour of the State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 7 note and line in built was also absent, again said that, there was in built wire in it again said that RBI was not written on that wire. In the meantime, there were 3/4 police personnel passing from the shop, he called them by raising noise and they came to his shop. He handed over said boy/accused Parveen Kaliya alongwith the currency note of Rs.500/ denomination bearing no.2AD574802. Police conducted the casual search of the accused and found 19 other notes of Rs.500/ denomination. The other 19 notes were taken by the police, number of notes mentioned by the police, after seeing the notes. Police recorded his statement Ex.PW3/A. The boy who was handed over to the police initially disclosed his name as Kalu and later on as Parveen. Police seized the currency note of Rs.500/ vide seizure memo Ex.PW3/B and other 19 notes recovered from his possession vide seizure memo Ex.PW3/C. He has also proved the disclosure statement of the accused Parveen @ Kaliya as Ex.PW3/D. He has also identified the currency notes which were given by the accused State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 8 Parveen @ Kaliya as Ex.P1 and also deposed that police has mentioned the number of the 19 counterfeit currency notes in the denomination of Rs.500/ recovered from the accused Parveen @ Kaliya in the seizure memo vide Ex.PW3/C. He identified memo of 19 notes as Ex.P2 (collectively). He deposed that he can identify the accused, but he failed to identify the accused Parveen @ Kaliya, in the court as the person he handed over to police.
He was cross examined by the ld. Addl. PP for the State as he stated that accused Parveen present in the court was not the person, who had handed over the notes. During his cross examination he denied the suggestion that he has not deliberately identified the accused, however, he admits that he has signed on the memos of arrest and personal search of Parveen Ex.PW3/E and Ex.PW3/F and which bears his signatures.
During cross examination of the ld. Counsel for the accused, he deposed that police remained at his shop till 9.30 p.m. and he signed on State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 9 the documents Ex.PW3/B to Ex.PW3/G and he signed on them at his shop, when the documents were written top to the bottom. On the same night, he was called at PS and signed some documents. He admitted the suggestion that the person who gave him said counterfeit currency note of Rs.500/ was not present in the court.
9. PW4 Ct. Anil has deposed that he alongwith ASI Raj Singh were attending DD No.23 and at about 8.30 p.m. when they were passing through Arya Medicose Store, C7, Chanakya Place, Uttam Nagar, they heard noise of the said shopkeeper. Later they came to know that the said person is the owner of the said medical store and his name is Raj Singh Baliyan. Raj Singh Baliyan handed over one counterfeit currency note of Rs.500/ by one person namely Parveen @ Kaliya. He deposed that accused Parveen @ Kaliya is present in the court and correctly identifed him, as the person who was handed over by complainant/PW3 alongwith counterfeit currency note of Rs.500/. He also deposed that on State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 10 the search of the said accused Parveen, from his right pocket of pant, 19 other counterfeit currency notes in the denomination of Rs.500/ each were also recovered. One note of Rs.500/, which was given by the complainant/PW3 and all other counterfeit currency notes were kept in two separate envelops and sealed with the seal of AS by PW6 ASI Raj Singh. He also deposed that he has put his signatures on the said seizure memo of counterfeit currency note of Rs.500/, which was seized vide memo Ex.PW3/B. He further deposed that number of the other 19 counterfeit currency notes were reduced into writing Ex.PW3/C in the register No.19. IO recorded statement of PW3 Rajbir Singh Baliyan and prepared the rukka, which was given to him for registration of the FIR and he got registered the FIR and handed over the original rukka and copy of FIR to the IO/PW6 ASI Raj Singh for further investigations. Accused Parveen was arrested vide memo Ex.PW3/E, his personal as Ex.PW3/F, his disclosure statement as Ex.PW3/D, in which he disclosed the name of other co State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 11 accused person Sunny. He also identified the case property.
He was not cross examined by the accused persons, therefore, his testimony remained unchallenged.
10. PW5 Ct. Prahlad Singh has deposed that on 10.08.2004 he has joined the investigations alongwith the IO/PW6 ASI Raj Singh and on that day, they left the PS with the accused Parveen @ Kaliya, and on his pointing out, arrested accused Sunny S/o. Raja Ram from his house C586, Mahavir Enclave, PartIII. And from the search of accused Sunny, 20 counterfeit currency notes in the denomination of Rs.500/ each were recovered from the right pocket of his pant, which he was wearing at that time. And said notes were put in a pullanda, sealed by the IO with the seal of AS and were seized vide memo Ex.PW5/A on which he signed at point A and accused signed at point X. Accused was interrogated and his disclosure statement Ex.PW5/B was recoded, which bears his signatures at point and that of accused at point X, and the accused was arrested vide State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 12 memo Ex.PW5/C and thereafter, accused Sunny lead them to the house of accused Bhanu Pratap i.e. RZA30, Sita Puri, PartI, Dabri, where accused Bhanu Pratap was arrested on the pointing out of accused Sunny. Accused Bhanu Pratap was interrogated and from his personal search 40 counterfeit currency notes in the denomination of Rs.500/ each were recovered, which were put in pullanda and sealed by the IO with the seal of AS and same were taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW5/D. He has further deposed that accused Bhanu Pratap was arrested vide memo Ex.PW5/E, his personal search vide memo Ex.PW5/F and accused Bhanu Pratap gave his disclosure statement Ex.PW5/G. He signed the same at point A and has disclosed his statement as Ex.PW5/G. Thereafter, accused Bhanu Pratap took them to the house of Buddhi Nath at RZ A/116, Sitapuri, PartI, Dabri, where accused Buddhi Nath was apprehended and after interrogation, he was arrested, vide memo Ex.PW5/H. Accused Buddhi Nath got recovered one polythene packet from State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 13 the iron box lying in his house, which was found containing 210 counterfeit currency notes in the denomination of Rs.500/ each, same were put in the pullanda by the IO and were sealed with the seal of AS and same were taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex.PW5/K in which IO had signed at point A. He identified the notes recovered from the possession of accused Buddhi Nath as Ex.PX1 (collectively) and 20 counterfeit currency notes in the denomination of Rs.500/ each from the possession of the accused Sunny as Ex.PX2 (collectively) and 40 counterfeit currency notes in the denomination of Rs.500/ each from accused Bhanu Pratap as Ex.PX3 (collectively). He also correctly identified all the four accused persons.
During cross examination he deposed that they left the PS at 5p.m and then said at 9 am. They reached to the house of accused Sunny within 40 minutes. He admit that they had not discussed with any neighbourer regarding the fact of accused having currency note before the State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 14 apprehension of the accused. He also deposed that 2/3 persons were asked to join the proceedings, but they did not join the proceedings. He also deposed that no public person signed the proceedings, though they were directed to sign the same by the IO and IO might have recorded their names and addresses.
He further deposed that from the house of accused Sunny, they went to the house of accused Bhanu Pratap in the auto by which they had also gone to the house of accused Sunny. He further deposed that he is not aware how much fare had been paid by the IO to the TSR driver. He also admit that no notice was given by the IO to those persons, who refused to join the investigations. He also deposed that nobody else was found at the house of accused except accused Bhanu Pratap.
He further deposed that from the house of the accused Bhanu Pratap they reached at the house of accused Budhi Nath on foot and he admitted that they remained at the house of accused Budhi Nath for about State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 15 40 minutes and from there reached to PS in Auto within 35 minutes, they reached at PS at about 2 pm.
11. PW6/IO ASI Raj Singh, has deposed that on receiving DD No.23 Ex.PW6/A, he alongwith Ct. Anil reached at C7, Chanakya Place, Arya Medical Store, where PW3 Rajbir called them and handed over one note of rs.500/, bearing No. 2AD574802, which he checked and find fake. PW3 handed over one person namely Parveen @ Kaliya, accused present in the court today. He took formal search of accused and 19 fake currency notes of Rs.500/ denomination were recovered from the right side pocket of pant, which accused was wearing at that time. He kept one note given to him by Raj Singh and 19 notes recovered from accused Parveen in separate envelop and sealed the same with the seal of AS and seized the same vide memo Ex.PW3/B and Ex.PW3/C respectively, which bears his signatures. He recorded the statement of the complainant Ex.PW3/A and prepared the rukka Ex.PW6/A and gave the same to Ct. State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 16 Anil for registration of the FIR and on the basis of which FIR Ex.PW2/A was registered. He prepared site plan Ex.PW3/G, arrested the accused Parveen vide memo Ex.PW3/F, recorded supplementary statement of complainant and deposited the case property recovered from the accused Parveen in the Malkhana and gave up accused in the lock up.
On 09.08.2004 he produced the accused Parveen @ Kaliya in the court of ld. MM and obtained one day PC Remand. On 10.08.2004, he arrested the accused Sunny from C586, Mahavir Enclave, Part - III, at the instance of accused Parveen @ Kaliya and 20 counterfeit currency notes of Rs.500/ denomination were recovered from him during search of his pant which he kept in an envelop and sealed with the seal of AS and prepared seizure memo Ex.PW5/A, interrogated accused and made his disclosure statement Ex.PW5/B, and later on apprehended accused Bhanu Pratap at the instance of both the accused persons (Parveen @ Kaliya and Sunny). On search of accused Bhanu Pratap 40 State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 17 counterfeit currency notes in the denomination of Rs.500/ each were recovered from his pant, which he seized after making pullanda and sealed with the seal of AS and prepared seizure memo Ex.PW5/D, arrested him vide seizure memo Ex.PW5/E. Later on, all the accused persons led him to the house of accused Buddhi Nath at RZA116, Sita Puri, PartI, Delhi and at the instance of accused persons Bhanu Pratap, Praveen @ Kaliya and Sunny recovered 210 fake currency notes in the denomination of Rs. 500 each, from the box lying in the abovesaid of accused house and said notes were sealed in a pullanda vide memo Ex.PW5/K, after sealing the same with the seal of AS, arrested accused vide arrest memo Ex.PW5/H, and prepared all the documents and memos as stated in the statement of all the witnesses He has also deposed that all the recovered case properties were deposited in the malkhana alongwith counterfeit currency notes recovered from all the four accused persons. He has also deposed State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 18 that during investigation, he had recorded statement of witnesses and also sent the counterfeit currency notes for opinion to Currency Note Press, Nashik Road, Nashik and collected the report and proved the same as Ex.PW6/X1. In his cross examination he deposed that he came back from the spot to the PS at 11.30 p.m. He did not add or omit anything in the statement of accused Parveen @ Kaliya.
During cross examination, PW6 deposed that he recorded the disclosure statement of accused Parveen at 11 pm on 8.8.2004. Rukka was sent to PS at about 11 pm and they came back at PS at 12 midnight. He further deposed that they left the PS at about 8.30/9am on 10.08.2004 for house of accused Sunny and reached there within ten minutes in the Auto. He further deposed that he do not know the measurement of the house nor can say about the construction of the floor in the said house. He further said that, accused Sunny was apprehended from outside the house. He further deposed that they did not enter in the house of accused Sunny. State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 19 He denied the suggestion that counterfeit currency notes were planted upon the accused.
He further deposed that he had asked the locality people to join the proceedings, but none of them agreed to join the same, but he did not give any notice to them. He further deposed that from the accused of Sunny, they returned to the police post and left the accused Parveen there. He further deposed that they reached at the house of accused Bhanu Pratap at about 10.15/10.30 pm and remained there for about one hour. He further deposed that public persons were asked to join the proceedings, but they refused to join the same, but notice was served upon them.
He further deposed that they remained at the house of Budhi Nath for about 1 ½ hour.
12. Ld. Counsel for the accused persons argued that accused persons have been falsely implicated in this case. Ld. Counsel for the accused Parveen @ Kaliya further argued that police official has State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 20 released the persons, who gave counterfeit note to the PW3 and implicated the accused Parveen @ Kaliya in his place and due to said reason PW3 has not identified the accused Parveen @ Kaliya as the persons who gave him the fake currency notes of Rs.500/ for change, therefore, accused is entitled to be acquitted.
13. Ld. Counsels for the accused persons further argued that there is a lot of material contradictions in the statement of PW5 and PW6, which make recovery doubtful from the accused Bhanu Pratap, Budhi Nath and Sunny. Hence, said accused persons are entitled to be acquitted.
14. On the other hand, Shri Sukhbeer Singh, ld. Addl. PP for the State argued that, though PW3 has not identified the accused Parveen @ Kaliya, as the person who gave him fake currency notes, as either he could not be identified by the PW3 due to lapse of time or he has been won over by the accused persons. He further argued that merely non State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 21 identification of accused do not make accused entitled for acquittal, as other PW i.e. PW6 ASI Raj Singh, PW4 Ct. Anil has identified the accused Parveen @ Kaliya as the person, who was arrested by them on the complaint of PW3, and further PW6 has recovered 19 notes from the search of the accused Parveen @ Kaliya, therefore, offence against the accused is proved beyond reasonable doubt. Ld. Addl. PP for the State further argued that from the testimony of PW5 and PW6 it is proved that huge recovery of counterfeit currency notes have been effected from the accused persons, which is not possible to plant. Therefore, offence u/s. 489 C IPC is proved against them and they are liable to be convicted.
15. Before analyzing the testimony of the witness, it would be appropriate to reproduce the Section 489B and 489C IPC, in which the accused has been charged which are reproduced as below: "489B. Using as genuine, forged or counterfeit currencynotes or bank notes Whoever sells to, or buys or receives from any other person, otherwise traffics in or use as genuine, any forged State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 22 or counterfeit currencynote or banknote, 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 currencynotes or banknotes.Whoever has in his possession any forged or counterfeit currency notes or banknote, 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 find, or with both."
16. To prove the offence punishable u/s. 489B and 489C IPC following things are required to be proved by the prosecution:
(i) The currency note recovered is the counterfeit currency.
(ii) The accused was found in possession of the said counterfeit currency notes.
(iii) He has knowledge or havingreason to believe that the notes he is using or is in possession are counterfeit note.
17. The report of Currency Note Press, Nashik Road, State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 23 Nashik, Maharashtra Ex.PW6/X1 proved that the recovered note of Rs. 500/ (bearing No. 2AD574802), which accused gave to the PW3 and the other 19 currency note of Rs.500/ recovered from him and other currency notes recovered from the other coaccused persons were counterfeit currency notes as it is mentioned in the report that : Paper: Not genuine Main watermark: Imitated Security thread: Imitated Paper thickness: Slightly thicker Printing Colours: Ink shades are not matching Colour Registration: Not correct.
Numbering : Not as per Genuine note.
Quality of Printing: Good.
The referred suspected notes of Rs.500/ denomination were received in intact sealed condition by the hand through Shri Raj Singh, ASI, New Delhi and are returned in sealed condition after examination.
These referred inspected notes are COUNTERFEIT NOTES. ON FRONT: The ingaglio effect for the words "GUARANTEED BY THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT" and figure "500" is absent. The body printing and tint printing lacks sharpness. The words "MAHATMA GANDHI"
are unsharp and not easily readable. The rosette design in the centre of the notes lacks sharpness and is broken. The R.B.I. seal lacks sharpness State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 24 and fine details of Ashoka Pillar are missing. Intaglio printing is absent "OVI" effect for figure "500" is not distinct.
ON BACKS: Floral design lacks sharpness and printing ink colours do not match with the genuine note. Intaglio print is absent. Note: The said report is self explanatory and kindly admit the same as evidence u/s. 292/293 Chapter XXIII Cr.P.C. 1973 (No.2 of 1974)
18. On perusal of the testimony of the witness, it is evident that main witness witness of the prosecution case is PW3. PW3 has deposed that one person has given him Rs.500/ note for change, which he found counterfeit after checking in UV Light, therefore, he apprehend him and handed over to PW6 ASI Raj Singh, who was passing through there, who recorded his statement Ex.PW3/A and arrested the accused. No suggestion has been given to him that no such incident had happened. Hence, testimony of PW3 is fully proved to that extent. But, PW3 had not identified the accused Parveen @ Kaliya, as the person who handed over him the fake currency note, During the cross examination by the ld. Addl. PP for the State he has denied that accused Parveen @ Kaliya is the State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 25 person present in the court, who has given him Rs.500/ counterfeit currency note, therefore, it is to be seen whether the person who was handed over by PW3 to PW6 was accused Parveen @ Kaliya or police has replaced the said person with accused Parveen @ Kaliya. In my view, merely because of nonidentification of the accused Parveen @ Kaliya by PW3, his entire testimony cannot be discarded and accused can be relied upon to the extent that he supported the prosecution case. PW3 has proved the statement Ex.PW3/A. On perusal of the said statement Ex.PW3/A, it is proved that, the name, parentage and address of the person, who handed over him counterfeit currency note of Rs.500/ was Parveen @ Kaliya Son of Gulshan Kumar and R/o. B/1, Gali No.21, Mahavir Enclave, Delhi. Further arrest memo, personal search memo exhibited Ex.PW3/F and Ex.PW3/E and confessional statement Ex.PW3/D also proved the same facts. All these memos bears signatures of PW3 and as well as that of accused Parveen @ Kaliya. From the testimony of State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 26 PW3 it is proved that these documents were prepared in his presence at the spot by PW6 ASI Raj Singh. No suggestion has been given to PW3 and PW6 that these documents were not prepared by PW6 at the spot or same were not signed by PW3 or by accused Parveen at the spot after PW3 handed over accused Parveen @ Kaliya to PW6 with the fake currency notes. PW4 Ct. Anil has not been cross examined at all.
Even in the statement u/s. 313 Cr.P.C., accused had not taken the defence that these documents does not bear his signatures or same have been obtained somewhere else. He had only taken the defence that he was picked up by the police on 7.8.2004, but no evidence has been led by the accused to prove that he was picked up on 07.08.2004. Neither any reason has been assigned, why he was picked up by the police official on 07.08.2004. He has not led any evidence to prove that that he had some criminal background, prior to the incident, due to which police has any ill motive to implicate him in this case. PW4 & PW6 have State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 27 deposited in their testimony that they have reached at the spot when accused Parveen @ Kaliya was already apprehended by the PW3 and who handed over him to PW6 ASI Raj Singh. Nothing has been come out in the cross examination of PW6 ASI Raj Singh that the said person, who was handed over by PW3 was not accused Parveen @ Kaliya, present in the court facing trial.
19. I am agree with the contention of ld. Addl. PP for the State that, it is possible that due to long gap between the date of incident and the date of evidence, PW3 might not be able to identify the accused. But, PW4 and PW6 had remained with him for a longer period, therefore, they would have to see and recognize him. Therefore, there is no reason to discard the testimony of PW4 and PW6, only on the ground that they are the police officials. There is no law that, testimony of the police officials should not be believed. In this regard I rely upon the judgment of our own High Court i.e. Mokham Singh Vs State of NCT of Delhi 1991 1 AD(CRI) State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 28 Criminal Delhi 229. In this case also PW3 who was the eyewitness did not identify the accused but Hon'ble Judge while relying upon the testimony of the IO and the Arrest memo Ex.PW6/D had upheld the appeal regarding conviction of the accused.
20. Hence, I held that it is proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused Parveen @ Kaliya is the person, who has handed over counterfeit currency note of Rs.500/ to PW3 and also later on 19 counterfeit currency notes were recovered from his possession.
21. Now coming to the last ingredient that whether the accused Parveen @ Kaliya has knowledge or reason to believe that notes which were recovered from his possession are counterfeit or not. It is very difficult to find out direct evidence of knowledge and same has to be inferred from the conduct of the accused. The accused has come to the shop of PW3 situated at Chanakya Place, Uttam Nagar to take the change of Rs.500/, he has not explained why he has come to take the change so State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 29 far from his residence, as he is the resident of Mahavir Enclave, which is situated quite a distance from the house of accused. Only reason for this appeared to be that he wants to avoid his identity to be disclosed as the person, who gave counterfeit notes, if he had tried to use it near his house there was more chances of his identification. 19 counterfeit currency notes have been recovered from the possession of accused, which is not a small quantity. He has not given any explanation in his statement u/s. 313 Cr.P.C from where he has got the said notes or that he has no knowledge that notes are counterfeit, therefore, I held that accused has knowledge that notes are counterfeit.
In view of the abvoesaid facts and circumstances I held that offence of 489B and 489C are proved against the accused Parveen @ Kaliya. As far as Section 420 IPC is concerned, since 489B is the specific offence for using fake counterfeit notes provided in the IPC. Therefore, in my view the accused cannot be convicted for the offence u/s. 420 IPC.
22. As far as accused Sunny is concerned, he has been State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 30 named in the confessional statement Ex.PW3/D by accused Parveen @ Kaliya as the person who gave him counterfeit notes. PW6 ASI Raj Singh has deposed that since accused Parveen @ Kaliya has disclosed the name of the other associates in his disclosure statement Ex.PW3/D, therefore, after taking on remand, he alongwith PW5 went to the house of accused Sunny at C586, Mahavir Enclave, PhaseIII, and pointing out of accused Parveen @ Kaliya, he apprehended the accused Sunny and from his search 20 fake currency notes of Rs.500/ each were recovered. Which he took into possession vide memo Ex.PW5/A. But I am agree with the contention of the ld. Counsel for the accused that there are lot of contradictions in the statement of PW6 ASI Raj Singh as well as, PW5 Ct. Prahlad. I am agree with the contentions of the ld. Counsel for the accused that when the accused Praveen @ Kaoiya disclosed the name of the accused Sunny on 08.08.2004 itself, then why PW6 waited till 10.08.2004, to visit to the house of accused Sunny, which was situated just 1½ km State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 31 away from the PS Uttam Nagar. No explanation has been given by the prosecution for such inordinate delay. Both the accused persons Parveen @ Kaliya and accused Sunny are the residents of Mahavir Enclave, therefore, if accused Sunny would have been acting in connivance with accused Parveen @ Kaliya for running the racket of fake currency notes, then definitely he would have come to know about arrest of the accused Parveen @ Kaliya and would have run away instead of waiting the police to arrive at his house and apprehend him with the counterfeit notes, or at least he would have disposed off the currency notes recovered from him to avoid his implication in this case. Further in the arrest memo Ex.PW6/B of the accused Sunny, date of arrest is mentioned as dt. 09.08.2004 at 1 a.m. Whereas PW5 and PW6 in their testimony have deposed that they arrested accused Sunny on 10.08.2004.
23. Further, I found there are lot of contradictions in the statement of PW5 and PW6. In the cross examination PW5 first says that they left State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 32 the PS at about 5 p.m. and then said at 9 a.m. Whereas PW6 says that they left from PS at about 8.30/9 a.m. No departure entry has been proved on record to prove exact time when they left the PS to arrest the accused Sunny. Further PW6 says that they reached at the house of accused Sunny within ten minutes from the PS, whereas, PW5 says that they reached at the house of accused within 40 minutes. PW6 ASI Raj Singh says that accused met him in the gali, outside his house and neither he nor any other person went inside the house of accused and he was arrested from the gali outside the House No. C586, Mahavir Enclave. Whereas PW5 says that, "the driver of the TSR had not accompanied us while entering in the house of accused Sunny, we had directed him (auto driver) to wait outside", which means they have entered in the house of accused Sunny and apprehended him from inside the house. Even PW5 says that the distance between PS and house of accused was 4/5 km, whereas PW6 says that the distance was just 1 km. Further, PW5 deposed that from the State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 33 house of accused Sunny, they had directly gone to the house of accused Bhanu Pratap with accused persons Sunny and Parven @ Kaliya, whereas PW6 deposed that from the house of accused Sunny, they went to the police post, where they left the accused Parveen @ Kaliya.
24. Further, as per Arrest memo Ex.PW5/E arrest of the accused persons Bhanu Pratap has been shown at 2 a.m. on 10.08.2004. Whereas it is stated by the PW6 in the cross examination that he remained in the house of accused Sunny till 10 a.m. therefore, he seems to have arrested after 10 a.m., Similarly the arrest of accused Budhi Nath has been shown at 4 a.m., in the arrest memo. whereas, he has been arrested after the arrest of accused Bhanu Pratap as from the house of accused Bhanu Pratap they had gone to the house of accused Budhi Nath. Hence, it is evident that arrest of the accused persons Sunny, Bhanu Pratap and Budi Nath are ante timed, as per their arrest memos. Considering the so many contradictions in the statement of PW5 and PW6, I am of the view that State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 34 testimony of PW5 and PW6 cannot be relied upon to the extent of arrest or recovery of counterfeit currency notes from accused Sunny, Bhanu Pratap and Budhi Nath particularly in the absence of corroboration from any independent public witness and, hence, I held that prosecution has failed to prove that accused persons Sunny, Bhanu Pratap and Budhi Nath were apprehended in the manner as deposed by the PW5 & PW6 or that counterfeit currency notes were recovered from them, therefore, they are acquitted for the charge u/s. 489 C IPC.
27. In view of the abovesaid facts and circumstances, accused Parveen @ Kaliya is convicted for offence punishable u/s. 489A and 489B IPC. Whereas, accused persons Budhi Nath, Bhanu Pratap and Sunny are acquitted for all the charges. Accused persons Budhinath, Bhanu Pratap and Sunny are directed to furnish their surities u/s. 437A Cr.P.C. till the next date of hearing. Now to come up for order on sentence on 25.02.2012.
Announced in the open court (Sanjeev Kumar)
On 21.02.2012 Addl. Sessions Judge
Rohini Courts: Delhi.
State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC
35
IN THE COURT OF SH. SANJEEV KUMAR
ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGEI(OUTER): ROHINI COURTS: DELHI I.D. NO.02401R5791722004.
SC No.134/11.
FIR No. 669/04.
PS UTTAM NAGAR.
U/s.489B/489C IPC STATE VERSUS 1. PRAVEEN @ KALIYA S/O. GULSHAN KUMAR R/O. M1, GALI NO.21, MAHAVIR ENCLAVE, PARTII, DABRI, DELHI.
Date of Institution in the Sessions Court : 22.05.2006 Date of Arguments: 06.02.2012 Date of Judgment : 21.02.2012 Date of sentence : 25.02.2012 ORDER ON SENTENCE 25.02.2012.
Present: Shri Sukhbeer Singh, ld. Addl. PP for the State.
Ms. Parkhi Tyagi, ld. Counsel for convict Parveen @ Kaliya. State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 36 It is submitted by the ld. Counsel for the convict Parveen @ Kaliya that convict Parveen @ Kaliya is aged about 31 years and has old father to look after. He is not a previous convict and there is no case is registered against him previously or during the trial. He has also remained in the custody for about three months. He is the only bread winner of his family, therefore, lenient view may be taken against the convict and release the convict on probation.
On the other hand, ld. Addl. PP for the State submits that convict has been convicted for using and in possession of counterfeit currencynotes, which is punishable u/s.489B and 489C IPC, which is a very serious, as it affect the economy of the Nation, therefore, maximum punishment provided in the Act should be given to the convict Parveen @ Kaliya.
Considering the facts and circumstances, in my view, releasing the convict Parveen @ Kaliya would not be a proper sentence, as the menace of counterfeit currency is affecting the economic health of the Nation and also affecting the public at large.
State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC 37 However, considering the convict's family circumstances, as well as, fact that he is not involved in any other criminal activity, I sentenced the convict for offence punishable u/s. 489B IPC for a period of 3 years Rigorous Imprisonment and a fine of Rs.10,000/ and in default of payment of fine, convict shall undergo 6 months simple imprisonment and for offence punishable u/s. 489C IPC for period of 2 years Rigorous Imprisonment and a fine of Rs.5,000/, in default of payment of fine, convict shall undergo 3 months Simple Imprisonment. Both the sentences shall run concurrently.
Convict shall be entitled for the benefit of Section 428 Cr.P.C. Convict is sentenced accordingly Session file be consigned to record room.
Announced in the open court (Sanjeev Kumar)
On 25.02.2012 Addl. Sessions Judge
Rohini Courts: Delhi.
State vs Praveen @ Kaliya & Ors FIR NO.669/04//PSUttam Nagar U/s. 420/489B/489C/34 IPC