Delhi District Court
Mens Rea. In Case Titled As Punnusamy vs State 1997 Scc (Cri)217 It on 25 March, 2009
1
IN THE COURT OF SH. SATINDER KUMAR GAUTAM,
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE (WEST-04), DELHI
SC NO. : 88/1/08
State
Versus
1. Radhey Shyam,
S/o Ram Chander,
R/o A-382D, DDA Flats,
Top Floor, Ranjeet Nagar, Delhi.
2. Virender Singh,
S/o Trilochan Singh,
R/o H.No.D-1877, Uday Chand Marg,
Kotla Mubarak Pur, Delhi.
Case arising out of
FIR No. : 450/06
U/s : 489 C&D IPC
P.S. : Kirti Nagar
Date of FIR : 16.09.2006
Date of Institution : 11.12.2008
Date of Final Arguments : 13.03.2009
Judgment reserved on : 13.03.2009
Date of judgment : 23.03.2009
JUDGMENT
1. The facts as revealed from the investigation is that on 16.09.2006, at about 07:15 PM near Timber Depot Govt. of M.P., Chunna Bhatti, Kirti Nagar, the accused Radhey Shyam was found trafficking and in possession of counterfeited currency notes, hence committed the 2 offence of having fake currency. Subsequently chargesheet was filed against the accused for the charge u/s 489B, 489C & 489D IPC. The co-accused Virender Singh was also charged for trafficking and possession of 8 counterfeit currency notes of the denomination of Rs.50/- and charged for the offence u/s 489B and 489C IPC.
2. The entire case of the prosecution is apparently on the forensic evidence collected from the residence of accused Radhey Shyam i.e. computer, printer etc. As per the prosecution the printer was seized by which the fake currency notes were printed, allegedly found in the possession of accused Radhey Shyam. Printer cannot work by itself without the command from the CPU. It means if printer printed the currency notes there should be a CPU which must have the record of commands given to the printer. Thus CPU is the only unit of the computer which can provide the conclusive proof of the accused's guilt or innocence. But the CPU has not been produced as evidence by the prosecution though apparently alleged to have been seized the same from the residence of the accused Radhey Shyam.
3. The prosecution in order to prove the guilt of the accused, have cited 10 witnesses namely SI Rajesh Kumar, HC Sheesh Ram, Ct. Kailash, Ct. Manoj Kumar, Mohit Narang, HC Hari Kishan, MHC(M), 3 Ct. N.B. Survose, SI Pawan Kumar, Ct. Jagdish, out of them 9 witnesses examined which include star witness Mohit Narang.
4. PW-1 Mohit Narang stated in his examination on 16.09.2006 that he was present at Subzi Mandi, Chuna Bhatti at the back side of PS Kirti Nagar. On that day at about 07:00 PM at the request of SI Rajesh Kumar he joined the investigation after disclosing that they had information of circulation of fake currency. Vegetable vendors were enquired and certain Govt. currency note were found to be circulated amongst them. One Radhey Shyam was apprehended by IO in his presence and in his search 29 fake note were recovered out of which 20 notes were of Rs.50/- and remaining were of Rs.100/-. The note were looking fake as per their texture. The accused Radhey Shyam was apprehended and was taken to PS Kirti Nagar vide arrest memo and personal search memo Ex.PW1/A and PW1/B. The notes were sealed in two pulandas of white colour cloth and were seized vide memo Ex.PW1/C. Thereafter they went to the house of accused Radhey Shyam, DDA Flats at Ranjeet Nagar where one computer and a machine and coloured printer and some printed notes were also collected from that place. These items were seized by police vide memo Ex.PW1/D &E. Thereafter police made further investigation in 4 the matter to find out the involvement of any other person in the case. Next day he again joined the investigation and alongwith police party went to Kotla Mubarakpur. It was disclosed by Radhey Shyam that Virender was a partner in the business of fake currency notes. Accused Virender was apprehended by police party and nothing was recovered from him. Accused Virender was arrested and personal search was conducted vide memo ExPW1/F & G.
5. PW-1 Mohit Narang was declared hostile and he has been cross examined by the APP for state. During the course of cross examination, PW-1 Mohit Narang admitted that he recalled 29 fake currency notes of Rs.50/- and 34 fake currency notes of Rs.20/- from accused Radhey Shyam. He has seen these notes and admitted that there were several currency notes with same number. When he went to the house of accused Radhey Shyam, he found that some of the notes recovered from the house were half printed either from back side or front side and strips of seal of RBI and Aluminium Block monogram of Mahatama Gandhi were also recovered from the house of Radhey Shyam alongwith other articles. The disclosure statement of accused Radhey Shyam recorded in his presence Ex.PW1/H. Accused Virender was arrested on his instance and 8 sheets having printing of Rs.50/- 5 with three series were recovered and these items were sealed and were seized vide memo Ex.PW1/I. The disclosure statement of accused Virender is Ex.PW1/J.
6. Iron hand press machine is Ex.P1, printer is Ex.P2, aluminum blocks are Ex.P3, ink Ex.P4, green colour roll is Ex.P5, aluminum block is Ex.P6, four aluminum strips Ex.P7, six currency notes of denomination hundred are Ex.P8/1 to 6, three currency notes of denomination of Rs.50/- are Ex.P9/1 to 3, twelve sheets having half print of currency notes of fifty are Ex.P10/1 to 12, one sheet having print of currency note of Rs.20/- is Ex.P11, nine sheets half prints of currency notes of Rs.100/- Ex.P12/1 to 9, eight sheets having print of currency notes on both sides of Rs.50/- are Ex.P13/1 to 8, nine currency notes of denomination of Rs.50/- Ex.P14/1 to 9, ten currency notes of denomination of Rs.50 are Ex.P16/ 1 to 10, nine currency notes of denomination of Rs.20/- are Ex.P17/1 to 9, twelve currency notes of denomination Rs.20/- are EX.P18/1 to 12, eleven currency notes of Rs.20/- are Ex.P19/1 to 11, two currency notes of denomination of Rs.20/- are Ex.P20/1 to 2 are the same which were recovered from the accused.
7. During the cross examination on behalf of accused Radhey Shyam, 6 PW-1 Mohit Narang stated that he does not remember whether he signed the documents before the police. However, he had signed the written documents, some of the documents were signed during the investigation. The accused Radhey Shyam was apprehended at 07:15 PM. The IO had asked some public persons to join the investigation but he does not know whether IO has asked to the shopkeepers and vendors to become witness. After apprehension IO conducted personal search of the accused but nothing was recovered. He signed all the papers in the police station. The description of the notes is not mentioned in Ex.PW1/D. After the arrest of the accused form the spot he went to the residential house at top floor, DDA Flat, from where the above said materials were recovered. It was not checked whether the computer was in working condition or not. Hand press, scanner and notes were seized. IO also seized CPU and printer. He was making efforts to become SPO of the area but was not so appointed. It is denied that in order to please the local police he used to become witness in criminal cases.
In the cross examination on behalf of accused Virender, PW- 1 Mohit Narang stated that he did not accompany the police to the 7 residence of the accused Virender. He had seen him only in the police station. He has no idea if any recovery of currency notes were ever effected from the possession of the accused Virender.
8. Apart from PW-1 Mohit Narang, the other witnesses are police officials who also were the members of the raiding party including PW- 4 Kailash Chand. He stated that when the accused Radhey Shyam was apprehended, IO has conducted search and found in possession of fake currency notes in right side pocket of his trousers. The said notes were in the denomination of Rs.50/- and Rs.20/-. The currency notes of Rs.50/- and Rs.20/- were having the same series. The fake currency notes separately kept in two envelopes. The accused Virender found in possession of 8 papers from his house having printed currency notes in the denomination of Rs.50/-. IO seized the said 8 papers. This witness was also cross examined by Ld. APP. In cross examination PW-4 constable Kailash Chand stated that he does not remember if the series of currency notes to the denomination of Rs.50/- by different i.e. to say the 10 notes of one series and another 10 notes were of different series and the remaining nine notes were also having different series. The fake currency notes of denomination of Rs.50/- and Rs.20/- were of different series. However, several notes in the different denomination 8 were having the same series. In the similar manner has deposed by PW-1 Mohit Narang and in cross examination stated that he did not sign any personal search memo and documents prepared at the spot. They went on the Govt. Vehicle at the house of accused Radhey Shyam. No public person was asked to join them at the time of entering the house of the accused. Since, the public witnesses were already with them. He does not remember whether the wife of the accused has signed the seizure memo. It is denied that the prints of the currency notes were planted as case property on accused and accused Radhey Shyam was picked up from Connaught Place brought to PS Kirti Nagar and was made to sit in the room of the IO SI Rajesh Kumar.
9. PW-4 Ct. Kailash Chand in the cross examination on behalf of accused Virender stated that he did not remember the time when he reached the house of the accused Virender. He did not remember whether the brother of the accused Virender was interrogated or was made to sign any document by the IO. The house of the accused Virender was not searched rather accused himself took out the recovered articles i.e. three sheets of papers from underneath the mattress of the bed. The sheets were having double print. He does not 9 know if the accused Radhey Shyam was running any Tea Shop at Talkatora Stadium. It is denied that constable Prahlad did not make payment for the snacks and tea taken from the shop of accused Radehy Shyam to which accused requested him to make the payment, which resulted in making out a false case against the accused Radhey Shyam.
10. PW-5 Constable Manoj Kumar, HC Seesh Ram, SI Rajesh Kumar and SI Pawan Kumar are deposed in their examination in the similar manner as deposed by the aforesaid PWs and proved the documents as exhibited in the similar manner. PW-5 Ct. Manoj Kumar in cross examination on behalf of accused Radhey Shuam stated that he does not know any person in the name of Mohit Narang nor he know if Mohit Narang had given any application in the police station to become SPO. IO also searched the accused after the arrest. He signed four papers at the spot. The rest of the suggestions have been denied.
PW-6 HC Sheesh Ram also confirm in the cross examination on behalf of accused Radhey Shyam that he also does not know any person in the name of Mohit Narang or Mohit Narang gave any application to become SPO. The rest of the cross examination was also in the similar manner as to the PW Ct. Manoj Kumar.
11. HC Sheesh Ram in cross examination of accused Virender had 10 stated that the house of accused Virender is at Kotla Mubarakpur. The other family members of the accused were also present. No public person was present at the time of raid. Accused Virender had produced the paper print used for preparing counterfeit currency from underneath the mattress of the bed. No family member of the accused had been made witness nor their signatures were obtained on any documents since the recovery was effected at night hours. No one came from the neighbourhood. No constable in the name of Parhlad was posted at the PS Kirti Nagar at the relevant time. However, one constable in the name of Parhlad was posted in 5-B Branch. He also does not know if the accused Radhey Shyam was running any Tea-Shop at Talkatora Stadium. It is also denied that Ct. Parhlad did not make payment for the snacks and tea taken for the shop of accused Radhey Shyam to which accused requested him to make the payment, which resulted in making out a false case against the accused persons.
12. PW-7 SI Rajesh Kumar stated that from the right side pocket of his black colour pant 29 currency notes of denomination of Rs.50/- and 34 currency notes of denomination of Rs.20/- were recovered. In the cross examination all the suggestions are denied.
PW-8 SI Pawan Kumar is also a witness of investigation as 11 carried on by him. All the documents were prepared during the investigation. No DD entry was made by SI Pawan Kumar. No DD entry was made even after departure of Ct. Kailash. He did not inform his senior officers about raid. No separate document was given to him by SI Rajesh Kumar about joining of public witness Mohit Narang since public witness was already with them. They did not ask further public persons to join the raiding party. He was not aware if PW Mohit Narang had applied for the post of SPO in the police station. It is denied for this purpose Mohit Narang used to visit the police station. No public witness was available being late hours except the wife of the accused. The wife of accused Radhey Shyam was not interrogated in this case. IO had not sought the opinion of any expert as to the working of the computer. He had no knowledge if the printer/scanner of HP Laser cannot function without any command without CPU. He had no knowledge if the alleged prints of currency notes were computer prints. He had filed the DD entry concerning police staff on patrolling duty on that day. It is denied that nothing was recovered at the instance of accused Radhey Shyam from his house and the alleged recovery was planted on him and the accused Radhey Shyam was picked up from Connaught Place, brought to PS Kirti Nagar and was mad to sit in the 12 room of IO SI Rajesh Kumar and there was some dispute regarding non payment of tea and snacks. In the cross examination PWs denied the search of accused Virender. Nothing was found. Accused Virender himself took out prints of fake currency notes from underneath the mattress of bed. The print was on both sides of the papers. The brother of the accused Virender was not the witness of recovery nor any other person from the neighbouring was joined at the time of raid. Neither they informed the local police station before going to the house accused Virender. No constable in the name of Prahlad remained posted at PS Kirti Nagar at the relevant time. He had no idea if Ct. Prahlad was posted at Special Cell. Other suggestions were also denied.
PW-9 Ct. N.B. Surevese took one sealed pulanda for depositing the same with Nasik Press. Till it remained in his custody it was not tampered with.
13. After completion of the prosecution evidence, the statement of accused u/s 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded. All the incrimidating evidence led by the prosecution were put to the accused persons one after the other. They denied the same as incorrect with the deposition that it is false case and the same has been planted. They do not want to lead any 13 defence evidence. The accused Radhey Shyam further stated that he has stated in his statement recorded on 16.09.2006 that in his restaurant outside the Talkatora Stadium, Prahlad, Kailash and Sheesh Ram came to his restaurant and they took 3 cold drinks and 3 plate chowmin. The total bill came to Rs.105/- . They did not pay the bill which resulted into a quarrel and also beaten him and his employee, where his father, brother and one lady were there. Several people were also gathered their. They noted down the address of the restaurant as they were in the civil dress. On the same day when he was in Connaught Place they came and lifted him and implicated in the false case. He does not want to lead any defence evidence.
14. Ld. APP for state examined all the material witnesses and also produced the case property and case property remained in Malkhana. It is not tampered in anyway, MHC(M) testified it in his deposition that the fake currency notes were recovered from the accused persons alongwith other printing material. It is further submitted that the accused persons have simply denied the deposition made by prosecution witnesses and made suggestion with respect to the running of restaurant by accused Radhey Shyam. There was a quarrel between the accused and the 3 constables namely Prahlad, Kailash and Sheesh 14 Ram for non payment of bill for tea and snacks. But there is no iota of evidence. The story as made by the accused persons is an afterthought and based junctures. The deposition of the witnesses are consistent, reliable and trustworthy. Therefore the accused persons are liable to be convicted.
15. The counsel for the accused Virender submitted that PW-1 Mohit Narang is interested to become an SPO as such joined the investigation. No fake currency notes were recovered from the possession of accused Virender. The other articles as alleged are recovered from the possession of the accused Radhey Shyam. The currency notes as shown recovered from the possession both the accused persons are of the same series. The mattress or the bad sheet has not been recovered and seized nor any independent witness with respect to the recovery from the house of the accused Radhey Shyam is examined. As such the provision of 489B & 489C do not attract. PWs have categorically stated in the cross examination that the family members of accused Virender were also present at the time of raid. But none of the family member have been cited in the list of witnesses nor any independent witness which creates a doubt about the prosecution story.
16. Ld. Counsel for the accused submitted that the entire case of the 15 prosecution based on the forensic evidence collected from the residence of accused Radhey Shyam i.e. computer, printer etc. The printer cannot work by itself without the command from the CPU. It means printer printed the currency notes there should be a CPU which must have the record of instructions/commands given to the printer. Thus the CPU is the only unit of the computer which can provide the conclusive proof of the accused's guilt or innocence. But for some reasons best known to the prosecution CPU has not been produced as evidence. Though they have seized the same from the residence of the accused. The prosecution has deliberately has not produced the same. Since there was not detected any incrimidating evidence against the accused Radhey Shyam.
It is further submitted that the PW-1 Mohit Narang is not sure about the place of working and time of working, this also creates doubt his credibility. PW-1 in the cross examination of defence counsel has stated that he cannot say if IO asked shopkeepers and vendors to become witness. Nothing was recovered from the personal search and further stated he does not know whether the computer was in working condition or not. IO also seized the CPU and the printer but he cannot say if IO has seized the Keyboard and Monitor. In the cross 16 examination it is stated that he wanted to become SPO of the area but he was not appointed. On 24.05.2007 PW-1 Mohit Narang gave the details of the items as recovered Ex.PW-1/D&E and stated tht the CPU, Monitor and Keyboard was not seized. But in the cross examination stated that aforesaid items were seized. It also creates doubt on the credibility of this witness.
It is further contended that PW-4 in his statement dt. 27.07.2007 stated that Printer, Hand Pressure Machine, 3-4 Plastic Rolls, one roll of silver colour ink were seized. PW-5 Ct. Manoj Kumar, PW-6 HC Sheesh Ram have given different version with respect to the seized articles. PW-7 SI Rajesh categorically stated that Senior officers were not informed. PW-8 admitted in the cross examination that he neither seized the vital part of evidence i.e. CPU nor he took the expert opinion in respect of the working of the Printer. The facts is that the accused Radhey Shyam has been arrested on the basis of the statement made by a professional police informer. The deposition of PWs are contradictory with respect to the possession of the recovered articles. The fact is that the prosecution has not proved that the accused was involved in any part of the process of making forged or counterfeit currency notes clearly absolves the accused 17 Radhey Shyam from any culpability u/s 489B, 489C & 489D IPC. The accused Radhey Shyam is liable to be acquitted.
17. Having heard the submission of the Ld. APP for state and counsel for the accused and carefully gone through the material placed on record for the purpose of attracting the provision of section 489B,C and D, the prosecution has to prove the 'Mens rea' of offences under sections 489B and 489C is "knowing or having reason to believe the currency notes or bank notes are forged or counterfeit". Without the aforementioned mens rea selling, buying or receiving from another person or otherwise trafficking in or using as genuine forged or counterfeit currency notes or bank notes, is not enough to constitute offence under section 489B IPC. So also possessing or even intending to use any forged or counterfeit currency notes or bank notes is not sufficient to make out a case under section 489C in the absence of the mens rea. In case titled as Punnusamy Vs State 1997 SCC (Cri)217 it is observed that "when the charge against the accused is that he purchased paddy from a peasant on payment of forged currency notes and could not explain wherefrom he received such forged currency notes and remained silent on that point in trial court, the prosecution case against him is strengthened by his silence and not offering any 18 explanation as to how he got such forged currency notes. So he is guilty u/s 489B for using forged currency notes as genuine."
18. Suspicions whether the notes were genuine will not amount to sufficient cause to believe. The word 'believe' is a very much stronger word than 'suspect' and it involves the necessity of showing that the circumstances were such that a reasonable man must have felt convinced in his mind that the note with which he was dealing was a forged one, and it was not sufficient to show that the accused was careless or he had reason to suspect or that he did not make sufficient enquiry to ascertain the fact. When therefore, a person in the usual course of business gets a currency note which he finds to be suspicious and tried to get rid of it, he would not be guilty either under section 489B or 489C as observed in Hamid Ali AIR 1961 Trip 46: 1961 2 Cri LJ 801 (Tripura). The collateral circumstances, such as, the bulk of the fake currency notes, the mixture of fake currency notes, the palming off of such notes quickly and the fact that the accused, by no stretch of imagination, could be said to be a layman or an uneducated man, are sufficient to infer that the accused had reason to believe that the currency notes with him were fake or counterfeit.
19. The prosecution must prove :-
19
(i) That the currency note or bank note in question was forged or counterfeit.
(ii) That the accused was in possession of it.
(ii) That he at the time of his possession knew or had reason to believe that it was forged or counterfeit.
(iii) That he intended to use it as genuine or that it might be used as genuine.
The onus lies on the prosecution to prove circumstances which lead clearly, indubitably and irresistibly to the inference that the accused had the intention to foist the notes on the public. Such intention can be proved by collateral circumstances such as that the accused had palmed off such notes before or that he was in possession of such and similar notes in such large numbers that his possession for any other purpose is inexplicable.
1. The object of the legislature in enacting the section is to stop the circulation of forged notes by punishing all persons, who knowing or having reason to believe them to be forged, do any act which would lead to their circulation. The accused must have the knowledge or reason to believe that the notes were counterfeit or forged. This proof 20 need not be necessarily by direct evidence. The various circumstances leading to the seizure of forged notes, the manner in which the accused came into possession of those notes are important circumstances to be considered. In case cited as (1971) 1 Mys. LJ 508 and 1999 Cri LJ 942 (DB) (Guj) : "Where the accused was found to be in possession of a large number of counterfeit currency notes it was held that it gave rise to a presumption that the possession of such notes was for the purpose of trafficking in currency notes." In another judgment 1989 All. APP. Cases 229 (234) "Where the accused was found in possession of forged currency notes and though he did not sell or commit any other act constituting an offence u/s 489B, his possession of such large number of counterfeit currency note at the time of his arrest in the company of two negotiators gives rise to reasonable inference that the accused intended to use the counterfeit notes as genuine. He thus committed an offence punishable under section 489C IPC.
2. In the present case PW-1 Mohit Narang in his examination in chief has stated that 29 fake currency notes of Rs.50/- and 34 fake currency notes of Rs.20 were recovered from accused Radhey Shyam and 8 sheets having printing of Rs.50/- with three series were recovered from the accused Virender. In cross examination he admitted that the 21 description of the notes was not mentioned in Ex.PW1/D. IO seized the CPU and printer and he signed the recovery documents but there is no suggestions in the cross examination of accused Radhey Shyam that no recovery of alleged currency notes from the possession of accused Radhey Shyam. In the cross examination of accused Virender PW-1 Mohit Narang has stated that he has no idea if any recovery was effected from the possession of accused Virender. PW-4 Ct. Kailash Chand has also stated that the fake currency notes were recovered from the possession of accused Radhey Shyam apart from that other equipments i.e. computer and printer etc. It is also further corroborated in the cross examination for the accused Radhey Shyam, it is denied that the currency notes were planted as case property on the accused. Similarly in the cross examination it is stated that sheets having 'double prints' produced in the court is a 'single print'. Ld. counsel for the accused has taken the defence that the accused Radhey Shyam was running a tea shop and Ct. Parhlad did not make the payment of the snacks as such accused Radhey Shyam made request for payment which resulted in making a false case against the accused persons. The defence taken by the counsel for the accused Radhey Shyam has also been explained in the statement of accused u/s 313 Cr.P.C. But there is 22 no iota of evidence to prove this contention either to produce Ct. Parhlad or employee of the accused Radhey Shyam or father and brother of the accused Radhey Shyam or any lady as stated in the statement u/s 313 Cr.P.C. In absence of any oral or documentary evidence on behalf of accused Radhey Shyam, the defence taken by him seems to be weaker in comparison to the prosecution case. The recovery seized fake currency notes report Ex.PW8/C also received from the Nasik Press which is also reflected that the currency notes as seized and examined are not genuine. The question for preparing of the forge currency notes through the computer that the help of CPU is to be attracted to the ingredients of section 489B & 489D. As per the judgment as cited 1989 All. APP case 229 (334) wherein it has been held that "Accused was found in possession of forged currency notes and though he did not sell or commit any other act constituting an offence, his possession of such large number of counterfeit currency notes at the time of his arrest gives rise to reasonable inference that the accused intended to use the counterfeit notes as genuine and committed an offence punishable u/s 489 C IPC.
3. Therefore, I am of the opinion that as per the evidence led by the 23 prosecution and the testimony of the prosecution witnesses are cogent, reliable and trustworthy an inspire the confidence to prove the ingredients of section 489C IPC, on the contrary there is no iota of evidence to disbelieve them. Apart from that the story as taken by the counsel for the accused Radhey Shyam seems to be afterthought and based on surmises and conjuncture hence accused Radhey Shyam is convicted for offence u/s 489C IPC.
4. For the purpose of considering the submissions of Ld. counsel for accused Virender to this effect PW-1 Mohit Narang has categorically stated that "I have no idea if any recovery of currency notes were ever effected from the possession of the accused Virender. He also did not accompany police to the residence of accused Virender. He had seen the accused Virender only in the police station. PW Kailash Chand in his cross examination has stated that "the house of the accused was not search, rather he himself took out the recovered articles i.e. three sheets of papers from underneath the mattress of the bed and the sheets were having double prints. PW- 5 Ct. Manoj made a contradictory statement that eight currency notes sheets each sheet containing three currency notes of denomination 24 of Rs.50/- were recovered from the house of accused Virender. Similarly stated by PW-6 HC Sheesh Ram in his cross examination for the accused Virender stated that accused Virender has produced paper prints used for the counterfeit currency notes. No public person or neighbour joined at the time of recovery. PW-7 SI Rajesh Kumar has not uttered anything against the accused Virender even though the family members of the accused Virender was available but not examined. PW SI Pawan Kumar took search but he could not find anything however accused Virender himself took out printed fake currency notes. Therefore, the evidence led by the prosecution with respect to accused Virender does not inspire any confidence and neither they are consistent nor unimpeachable even have no corroboration by testimony of independent witness. The police officials who have allegedly made the deposition for recovery of printed paper, the series of the printed paper as alleged to be recovered from the accused Radhey Shyam is also same.
5. Therefore the presumption can be drawn that the alleged recovery can be planted and motivated. The public witness Mohit Narang have categorically stated that "nothing has been recovered from the 25 possession of accused Virender". Therefore, all the evidence is left to be unsustainable to booked the accused Virender within the four corner of the guilt and the charge as framed. The ingredients of the charge are also not applicable to the facts and evidence on record against the accused Virender.
6. With the aforesaid discussion and deposition of the witnesses, I do not find any sustainablity of the charges leveled against the accused Virender. Accordingly accused Virender is hereby acquitted. Announced in the open court (SATINDER KUMAR GAUTAM) today i.e. on 23.03.2009 ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE (WEST-04):DELHI