Delhi District Court
State vs Santosh Kumar Singh on 3 March, 2025
IN THE COURT OF DR. HARDEEP KAUR: ASJ-02:
NEW DELHI DISTRICT: PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, DELHI
Date of Judgment: 03.03.2025
FIR No. 78/2019
PS: Special Cell
U/s: 489B/489C IPC
SC No.382/2019
Unique case ID NO.DLND01-015347-2019
COMPLAINANT State
REPRESENTED BY State
ACCUSED Santosh Kumar Singh
S/o. Sh. Anil Kumar Singh
R/o Vill. Karan Kudariyan,
P.S. Masrakh, District
Chhapra Saran, Bihar.
REPRESENTED BY Sh. D. P. Pandey, Ld.
counsel for accused
Date of Offence 06.06.2019
Date of FIR 06.06.2019
Date of Charge-sheet 30.07.2019
Date of Framing of Charges 29.11.2019
Date of commencement of evidence 11.03.2020
Date on which arguments concluded 28.01.2025
Date of the Judgment 03.03.2025
Final Order Convicted
DETAILS OF ACCUSED :-
State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh
FIR No. 78/2019
PS: Special Cell Page no. 1 of 32
Rank of Name of Date of Date of Offences Whether Sentence Period of
Accused Accused Arrest Release on charged Acquitted imposed Detention
Bail with or Undergone
convicted during Trial
for purpose
of section
428, Cr.P.C.
Santosh 06.06.2019 11.03.2020 489B/ Convicted -- --
Kumar 489C IPC
Singh
LIST OF PROSECUTION / DEFENCE / COURT WITNESSES
A. PROSECUTION
RANK NAME NATURE OF EVIDENCE
(EYE WITNESS, POLICE
WITNESS, EXPERT WITNESS,
MEDICAL WITNESS, PANCH
WITNESS. OTHER WITNESS)
ASI Narayan Duty Officer (PW1)
Ram
Head Constable Vikas Member of raiding party (PW2)
Mudgal
Head Constable Manjeet Member of raiding party (PW3)
Inspector Anukul Second IO (PW4)
Head Constable Sushil MHC(M) (PW5)
Kumar
ASI Suresh First IO (PW6)
Kumar
Nodal Officer, Ajay Qua Mobile no. 7260887326(PW7)
Bharti Airtel Ltd. Kumar
State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh
FIR No. 78/2019
PS: Special Cell Page no. 2 of 32
Joint General Arindam Expert from Currency Note Press,
Manager Biswas Nasik. (PW8)
Sub Inspector Prahlad Deposited case property in CNP,
Prasad Nasik. (PW9)
Head Constable Raj Police Witness to prove entries in
Kumar Logbook containing movement of
government vehicles. (PW10)
B. DEFENCE WITNESS, IF ANY :-
RANK NAME NATURE OF EVIDENCE
(EYE WITNESS, POLICE WITNESS,
EXPERT WITNESS, MEDICAL
WITNESS, PANCH WITNESS. OTHER
WITNESS)
Chintu Kumar DW1
C. COURT WITNESSES, IF ANY :- NA
RANK NAME NATURE OF EVIDENCE
(EYE WITNESS, POLICE WITNESS,
EXPERT WITNESS, MEDICAL
WITNESS, PANCH WITNESS. OTHER
WITNESS)
NIL
LIST OF PROSECUTION / DEFENCE / COURT EXHIBITS
A. PROSECUTION :-
Sr. No. Exhibit Number Description
1 Ex. PW1/A Computerised print out of FIR.
State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh
FIR No. 78/2019
PS: Special Cell Page no. 3 of 32
Original FIR Register seen and
returned.
3. Ex. PW1/B Endorsement
4. Ex. PW1/C Certificate u/s 65B of Indian
Evidence Act
5. Ex. PW1/D Copy of Qaimi and Bandi DD
No. 7A. (original Roznamcha
containing the relevant DD
entry is seen and returned)
6. Ex. PW2/A Seizure memo of recovered
250 FICNs
7. Ex. PW2/B Seizure memo of recovered
bag.
9. Ex. PW2/C Personal Search Memo of
accused (Cursory Search)
10. Ex. PW2/D Arrest Memo of accused
11. Ex. PW2/E Personal Search Memo of
accused
12. Ex. PW2/F Seizure memo of mobile
phone of accused
13. Ex. PW2/G Seal returning over memo
14. Ex. PW2/H Body Inspection Memo of
accused
15. Ex. PW2/P1(Colly) 250 FICNs alongwith
polythene
16. Ex. PW2/P2 Recovered bag
17. Ex. PW 2/P3 and Ex. P3 Mobile phone of accused
18. Ex. PW4/A Disclosure statement
19. Ex. PW4/B Site Plan
20. Ex.PW5/A to Ex. PW5/C Relevant entries in Register
no. 19
21. Ex. PW6/A Copy of DD No. 2A
State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh
FIR No. 78/2019
PS: Special Cell Page no. 4 of 32
22. Ex. PW 6/B Copy of DD No. 3A
23. Ex. PW6/C Rukka
24. Ex. PW7/A & Ex.PW7/B CAF & CDR with documents
qua mobile no. 7260887326
25. Ex. PW7/C Certificate u/s 65B of Indian
Evidence Act
26. Ex. PW7/D CAF, Aadhar Card, CDR &
Certificate u/s 65B of Indian
Evidence Act.
27. Ex. PW 8/A Report of Currency Note
Press, Nasik.
28. Ex. PW10/A Copy of relevant entry
regarding movement of Ertiga
Car bearing no. DL 1CR 7189
B. DEFENCE: NIL
Sr. No. Exhibit Number Description
Nil.
C. COURT EXHIBITS :- NIL
Sr. No. Exhibit Number Description
Nil Nil
D. MATERIAL OBJECTS :- NIL
Sr. No. Material Object Number Description
1. Nil Nil
State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh
FIR No. 78/2019
PS: Special Cell Page no. 5 of 32
JUDGMENT
1. Accused Santosh Kumar Singh has been sent up to face trial in this Court for commission of offences punishable under section 489B/489C IPC as to the trafficking/use/possession of Fake Indian Currency Notes (hereinafter referred to as "FICNs").
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case is that on 06.06.2019 at about 9.45 a.m, ASI Suresh Kumar received a secret information in his office from the secret informer regarding arrival of accused Santosh Kumar Singh, who is indulged in trafficking of FICNs, near Kashmere Gate, Delhi, slip road from ISBT towards Tis Hazari Court between 12 p.m to 1.00 p.m, for delivering the huge consignment of FICNs from Motihari, Bihar to one Devender of Haryana in Delhi. Insp. Vivekanand Pathak was informed about the secret information by ASI Suresh Kumar and as per the directions of senior officers, ASI Suresh Kumar constituted the raiding party consisting of himself, ASI Sanjeev, HC Vikas Mudgal, HC Ritu Raj and Ct. Manjeet. The raiding party reached the place of information in government vehicle bearing registration no. DL 1CR 7189. ASI Suresh Kumar requested passersby to join the raiding party but none agreed and left the spot without disclosing their names and addresses. All the raiding team members took their respective positions in scattered manner.
State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh FIR No. 78/2019 PS: Special Cell Page no. 6 of 32 At about 10.12. p.m, one person was seen coming towards Tis Hazari Court who was carrying one grey colour bag on his shoulder and stopped near the wall of ISBT Kashmere Gate, 60 meters ahead of Ring Road and started waiting for someone. The said person was identified by secret informer as Santosh Kumar Singh. After sometime one person came on a motorcycle who has covered his face with helmet and he stopped near accused Santosh Kumar Singh and started talking to him. At about 12.20 p.m, accused Santosh Kumar Singh took out one black polythene from his shoulder bag and gave it to the motorcyclist. ASI Suresh Kumar moved towards them but motocyclist left the place and since there was no number plate on motorcycle, the number could not be noted down. ASI Suresh Kumar apprehended accused Santosh Kumar Singh who on enquiry disclosed his identity as Santosh Kumar Singh. ASI Suresh Kumar took black polythene from accused Santosh Kumar Singh and on taking search, three bundles containing 250 notes in the denomination of Rs.2,000/- each totalling Rs.5 lacs were recovered from the said black polythene. The recovered FICNs were kept in recovered black polythene in transparent plastic container and sealed with the seal of SPL CELL NR 1. The shoulder bag was also searched but nothing incriminating was found in it and the same was also seized. Seal after use was handed over to HC Vikas Mudgal. Accused was interrogated and he disclosed that the motorcyclist was Devender from Haryana. ASI Suresh Kumar prepared rukka and got the FIR registered.
State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh FIR No. 78/2019 PS: Special Cell Page no. 7 of 32 After registration of the present FIR, further investigation was entrusted to SI Anukul. SI Anukul reached at the spot where ASI Suresh Kumar handed over to him the documents, case property and also the accused. SI Anukul interrogated the accused who admitted to have been indulged in supply of FICNs in Delhi, Uttar Pradesh and Haryana after getting the same from Naval of Motihari, Bihar and he also admitted to have been in possession of FICNs worth Rs.5 lacs for supplying the same to one Devender.
During investigation, site plan was prepared, accused was arrested, one mobile phone was seized from the possession of accused. Despite best efforts, the other associates of accused, namely Naval and Devender could not be apprehended as the accused failed to tell their complete name and address. Exhibits i.e. FICNs were deposited in Currency Note Press, Nasik and report was obtained in this regard. During investigation, the mobile phone bearing no. 7260887326 was found to be registered in the name of accused Santosh Kumar Singh and certified copies of CAF, CDR and documents were recovered in this regard. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed in the court of Ld. CMM, NDD on 30.07.2019 and vide order dated 27.08.2019, the present case was committed to this Court.
3. Vide order dated 29.11.2019, charges were framed against accused Santosh Kumar Singh for commission of offence State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh FIR No. 78/2019 PS: Special Cell Page no. 8 of 32 punishable u/s 489B/489C IPC to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. In order to prove its case, the prosecution has examined as many as ten (10) witnesses:-
PW-1 ASI Narayan Ram was the Duty Officer. He deposed that on 06.06.2019, Constable Manjeet brought Rukka, on the basis of which he registered the FIR Ex.PW 1/A. He made endorsement Ex.PW 1/B on the rukka and issued certificate u/s 65B of Indian Evidence Act Ex.PW 1/C. He has also proved the Qaimi and bandi DD No. 7A as Ex. PW1/D. PW-2 HC Vikas Mudgal was member of the raiding party. He has deposed that on 06.06.2019, he was informed about receipt of secret information by ASI Suresh regarding presence of accused Santosh Kumar Singh at Kashmere Gate, Delhi. As per the directions of senior officers, he alongwith ASI Suresh Kumar, HC Ritu Raj, ASI Sanjeev and Ct. Manjeet left for place of information and on the way, public persons were asked to join the investigation but they all refused.
After reaching the spot at 11.30 a.m, the members of raiding team took their positions near ISBT Kashmere Gate. After sometime, one person was seen coming from the side of Tis Hazari and he was carrying a black and mehroon colour bag on his shoulder. Said person was State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh FIR No. 78/2019 PS: Special Cell Page no. 9 of 32 identified as Santosh Kumar Singh by secret informer. Accused Santosh Kumar Singh kept waiting for someone. After sometime, one motorcyclist wearing a helmet came there. Accused Santosh Kumar Singh attempted to hand over black colour polythene to the motorcyclist but due to suspicion, the motorcyclist fled away from the spot who was wearing helmet. The raiding team managed to apprehend accused Santosh Kumar Singh who on enquiry disclosed his name and parentage. On checking, black colour polythene, it was found to be containing two wads of 100 notes each and one wad of 50 notes in the denomination of Rs.2,000/- each. ASI Suresh kept the recovered FICNs alongwith polythene in a transparent plastic box, applied doctor tape and sealed it with the seal of SPL CELL NR1 and seized the same vide memo Ex. PW 2/A. The bag of accused was also checked but nothing incriminating was found in it and the said bag was also kept in sealed parcel and seized vide memo Ex. PW 2/B. Accused was interrogated and he disclosed that he had brought FICNs from Bihar to hand over the same to one Devender in Delhi.
He further deposed that ASI Suresh prepared a Tehrir and entrusted the same to HC Manjeet for getting the FIR registered. HC Manjeet accordingly got the FIR registered and telephonically informed the FIR number to ASI Suresh. In the meanwhile, SI Anukul also arrived at the State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh FIR No. 78/2019 PS: Special Cell Page no. 10 of 32 1 spot and he was handed over the custody of accused alongwith recovered FICNs and other documents by ASI Suresh. SI Anukul arrested accused vide arrest memo Ex. PW 2/D, conducted his personal search vide personal search memo Ex. PW 2/E. He has further deposed that seal after use was handed over to him by ASI Suresh. He has correctly identified accused Santosh Kumar Singh in the court.
PW2 also proved 250 FICNs in the denomination of Rs.2000/- each alongwith black polythene as Ex.PW2/P1. The black and mehroon bag as Ex.PW2/P2.
During cross-examination by Ld. Addl. PP, PW2 admitted all the material particulars that raiding team was organized by ASI Suresh Kumar; ASI Suresh Kumar had informed them about the secret information that accused Santosh Kumar Singh would come at Slip road, leading towards Tis Hazari between 12.00 p.m-1.00 p.m for delivery of FICNs to Devender; secret information was recorded by ASI Suresh Kumar vide DD No. 2A and IO procured the IO kit and seal of SPL CELL NR1 and left for the place of information in government vehicle bearing registration no. DL 1CR 7189 at 10.25 a.m and they reached at the slip road at about 11.30 a.m. He further admitted that accused Santosh Kumar Singh, whose name was subsequently confirmed, came to slip road at about 12.10 p.m; the motorcycle on which the other person came State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh FIR No. 78/2019 PS: Special Cell Page no. 11 of 32 1 to collect the FICNs was not having any number plate. He further admitted that IO filled up the FSL form at the spot itself; upon cursory search of accused, one mobile phone was recovered which was seized by the IO vide seizure memo Ex. PW2/F. He further admitted that seal was handed over to him by ASI Suresh and he returned the same to ASI Suresh on 26.06.2019 vide seal returning memo Ex.PW2/G prepared by SI Anukul and at the time of arrest of accused, SI Anukul prepared body inspection memo Ex. PW 2/H. PW2 identified the black and red colour mobile phone make Karbonn as Ex. PW 2/P3.
PW-3 HC Manjeet was also member of the raiding party. He has deposed that on 06.06.2019, on receipt of secret information regarding presence of accused Santosh Kumar Singh at Slip road leading from Kashmere Gate towards Tis Hazari Courts between 12 noon to 1.00 p.m for supply of FICNs to one Devender R/o Haryana, ASI Suresh Kumar, on the instructions of senior officers, recorded the information vide DD no. 2A and organized a raiding team including the secret informer. The IO also collected the IO kit and seal of SPL CELL NR1 and thereafter, they left the office in government vehicle at about 10.25 a.m. He further deposed that on his way, the IO requested few public persons to join the raiding party but none agreed; they reached Slip road at about 11.30 a.m where also public persons were requested by the IO to join the raiding party State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh FIR No. 78/2019 PS: Special Cell Page no. 12 of 32 1 but none came forward and thereafter they took their respective positions around the slip road.
He further deposed that at about 12.10 p.m, one person carrying a pithu bag on his shoulder came from the side of Tis Hazari Courts and stood at the slip road near the wall of Kashmiri Gate; the secret informer identified the said person as accused Santosh Kumar Singh and after some time, one person wearing helmet came on black motorcycle and stopped near accused Santosh Kumar Singh and started talking to him. At about 12.20 p.m, accused Santosh Kumar Singh took out a black colour polythene from his pithu bag and was handing over the same to the said motorcyclist and on seeing this, ASI Suresh alongwith raiding team members approached accused persons but the said motorcyclist ran away from the spot without taking the polythene. The motorcycle was not bearing any number plate. The raiding team managed to apprehend accused Santosh Kumar Singh. On checking the black polythene, three wads containing 250 notes in the denomination of Rs.2,000/- each were recovered and the same were kept by the IO in transparent plastic box applying doctor tape, sealed them and seized the same alongwith the bag of accused vide seizure memos Ex. PW 2/A and Ex. PW 2/B. The IO conducted body inspection memo of accused Ex. PW 2/C. Accused disclosed the name of motorcyclist as Devender. Seal after use was handed to PW2 HC Vikas State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh FIR No. 78/2019 PS: Special Cell Page no. 13 of 32 1 Mudgal. The IO prepared rukka and handed over the same to him for registration of FIR and after registration of FIR, he handed over the original rukka and copy of FIR to second IO SI Anukul. PW3 identified the case property i.e. 250 FICNs Ex. PW 2/P1 and one black and mehroon backpack Ex. PW 2/P2.
PW-4 Inspector Anukul was second IO of the present case. He deposed that on 06.06.2019, as per the directions of higher police officials, he took up the further investigation and he accordingly reached the spot where he met ASI Suresh Kumar alongwith other raiding team members and accused Santosh Kumar Singh. ASI Suresh Kumar also handed over to him two sealed parcels, FSL form, seizure memo and also the custody of accused Santosh Kumar Singh. He further deposed that HC Manjeet who had gone for registration of FIR telephonically informed him about the number of the FIR and he accordingly mentioned the FIR number on the memos prepared by ASI Suresh Kumar.
PW4 further deposed that he arrested accused Santosh Kumar Singh vide arrest memo Ex. PW 2/D, conducted his personal search vide memo Ex. PW 2/E and also recorded his disclosure statement Ex. PW 4/A. He also seized the mobile phone of accused during his search vide memo Ex. PW 2/F; he also conducted body inspection of accused vide memo Ex. PW 2/H; deposited the case property in the malkhana; got the exhibits deposited in State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh FIR No. 78/2019 PS: Special Cell Page no. 14 of 32 1 Currency Note Press, Nasik through ASI Prahlad Prasad; procured the result and also procured the CDR of the mobile phone of accused from the concerned service provider. He correctly identified the accused. PW-5 HC Sushil Kumar was MHC(M) at PS Special Cell, Lodhi Colony. He proved on record the relevant entry made in Register no.19 at Serial no.1709 regarding deposit of two sealed pullandas Mark A and Mark B alongwith seizure memos and also mobile phone and personal search articles of accused. He has proved the relevant entries in register no. 19 and 21, Road Certificate and acknowledgment as Ex. PW 5/A to Ex. PW5/C. PW-6 ASI Suresh Kumar was first IO of the present case. He has deposed on the lines of investigation. He has proved the copy of DD No. 2A Ex. PW6/A, copy of DD No. 3A Ex. PW6/B and rukka Ex. PW 6/C. He also correctly identified accused as well as the case property. After registration of the present FIR, further investigation was entrusted to SI Anukul (PW4). PW6 has corroborated the testimony of PW3 HC Manjeet and PW4 Inspector Anukul. PW-7 Ajay Kumar was Nodal Officer, Bharti Airtel Ltd. He proved the copy of Customer Application Form and CDR alongwith copy of Aadhar Card with respect to Mobile No. 7260887326 as Ex. PW7/A and Ex.PW7/B, as per which, the SIM card was issued in the name of Santosh Kumar Singh s/o Anil Kumar. He has proved his certificate u/s 65B of State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh FIR No. 78/2019 PS: Special Cell Page no. 15 of 32 1 Indian Evidence Act as Ex.PW7/C. He has further deposed that as per record, on receipt of notice u/s 91 CrPC dated 03.07.2019, Nodal Officer Rajiv Vashishta furnished CAF, CDR of the relevant period, copy of Aadhar Card alongwith certificate u/s 65B of Indian Evidence Act. Since he had worked together with Nodal Officer Rajiv Vashishta, he identified his handwriting and signature and proved the CAF, Aadhar Card, Call Detail and certificate u/s 65B of Indian Evidence Act as Ex. PW 7/D (Collectively). PW-8 Arindam Biswas, an expert from Currency Note Press, Nasik has examined 250 FICNs in the denomination of Rs.2,000/- each and gave his detailed report Ex. PW 8/A. As per the report, all the suspected notes were found to be counterfeited.
PW-9 SI Prahlad Prasad has deposed that on the instructions of IO, he collected the case property from the MHC(M) alongwith FSL form vide RC No. 151/21/19 and deposited the same in Currency Note Press, Nasik vide acknowledgment receipt. He has deposed that so long case property remained in his possession, the same was not tampered with in any manner. He has further deposed that on 24.06.2019, after his return from Nasik, he handed over the copy of acknowledgment receipt to MHC(M). PW-10 HC Raj Kumar has proved the relevant entry in the Logbook regarding movement of government vehicle i.e. Ertiga Car bearing registration no. DL 1CR 7189 for the State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh FIR No. 78/2019 PS: Special Cell Page no. 16 of 32 1 period from 01.06.2019 to 06.06.2019 as Ex. PW10/A. STATEMENT OF ACCUSED
5. After conclusion of Prosecution Evidence, statement of accused Santosh Kumar Singh was recorded u/s 313 CrPC wherein he has denied the entire prosecution case submitting that it is a false case against him. He further stated that he was picked up from Chhapra Railway Station prior to the date of registration of present FIR. His arrest was planted in Delhi and recovery of FICNs were planted upon him as nothing incriminating was recovered from his possession.
6. In defence, accused Santosh Kumar Singh has examined DW-1 Chintu Kumar. He deposed that he knows accused Santosh Kumar Singh who was working with him as carpenter since 2018 in Muzaffarpur. He further deposed that on 05.06.2019, he alongwith accused had to board the train Bihar Sampark Kranti from Chhapra Railway Station to Delhi and when the train was about to reach Chhapra railway station, three persons came there and took the accused with them and they all boarded the train in reservation quota with the accused and he boarded the train in general compartment. He further deposed that he tried to contact accused on phone but he could not be contacted. After reaching Delhi, he again tried to contact accused but he could not be contacted and thereafter, phone of accused got switched off. After two days, he came to know that accused was apprehended State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh FIR No. 78/2019 PS: Special Cell Page no. 17 of 32 1 by the police. He further deposed that accused is still working with him as Carpenter.
ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF PROSECUTION
7. It is submitted by Ld. Addl. PP that in the present case, charge u/s 489B and 489C IPC has been framed against the accused. There is huge recovery of FICNs worth Rs.5 lacs from the accused. Prosecution has examined ten witnesses. It is further submitted that out of ten witnesses, PW4 Inspector Anukul who is second IO and PW6 ASI Suresh Kumar who is first IO are very important witnesses. They both have categorically deposed about the investigation conducted at the spot and no contradictions are found in their statements as far as the investigation conducted at the spot is concerned. They both have duly supported the prosecution version and correctly identified the accused as well as the complete case property. PW3 HC Manjeet is also one of the member of the raiding team and he also corroborated the version of PW4 and PW6. PW5 is MHC(M); PW8 is an expert from Currency Note Press, Nasik who examined the recovered notes and found them to be counterfeited notes; PW9 deposited the case property in Currency Note Press Nasik and PW10 proved the relevant entry in logbook regarding the movement of government vehicle i.e. Ertiga Car bearing registration no. DL 1CR 7189 for the period from 01.06.2019 to 06.06.2019.
State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh FIR No. 78/2019 PS: Special Cell Page no. 18 of 32 1
8. It is further submitted by Ld. Addl. PP that from the testimony of above ten prosecution witnesses, prosecution has established the fact that it was accused who was found in possession of FICNs and he was intending to circulate the same in the market and the recovered FICNs have been opined to be counterfeited by the expert from Currency Note Press, Nasik. He further submitted that accused be convicted for the offences charged with.
9. It is submitted by Ld. Addl. PP that in support of his defence, accused has examined DW1 but during his cross-examination on behalf of State, it has come on record that he knew the accused as he has been working with him but despite that no efforts were made by DW1 to make a complaint qua alleged lifting of accused by Delhi Police on 05.06.2019 from Chhapra Railway Station and no action was taken on his part till the date he appeared before this Court for his testimony. Hence the defence of the accused is not at all believable. There is huge recovery of FICNs worth Rs.5 lacs, therefore no question of false implication of accused arises in the present case.
ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF ACCUSED
10.It is submitted by Ld. Defence Counsel that on 05.06.2019, accused Santosh Kumar Singh alongwith DW1 Chintu Kumar had to board the train from Chhapra Railway Station for coming to Delhi and when the train was about to reach Chhapra railway State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh FIR No. 78/2019 PS: Special Cell Page no. 19 of 32 1 station, he was lifted by three police officials who took the accused with them and boarded the train in reservation quota with the accused whereas DW1 Chintu Kumar boarded the train in general compartment. It is submitted that accused was shown to be apprehended from near ISBT Kashmere Gate, Delhi at the pointing out of secret informer and from his possession, FICNs were shown to be allegedly recovered. It is submitted that accused has been falsely implicated in the present case as he has nothing to do with the alleged offence and recovery of alleged FICNs has been planted upon him and nothing incriminating has come on record to prove the guilt of the accused in the present case.
11.It is further submitted that no CCTV footage of the relevant date of the place at ISBT Kashmere Gate, Delhi had been collected to show his apprehension in the manner as alleged by the prosecution. No public witnesses were joined by the IO during the investigation.
12.It is further submitted by Ld. Defence Counsel that accused belongs to a poor strata of society and hence, FICNs worth Rs.5 lacs are planted one in order to falsely implicate him in the present case.
13.I have heard and considered the submissions made by Sh. D. P. Pandey, Ld. Counsel for accused and Sh. Irfan Ahmed, Ld. State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh FIR No. 78/2019 PS: Special Cell Page no. 20 of 32 2 Addl. PP for State and also carefully gone through the material available on record.
14.It is pertinent to mention herein that arguments in the present case were concluded on 28.01.2025 and matter was fixed for clarifications, if any/order for 12.02.2025. On this date, accused Santosh Kumar Singh was absent and exemption application was moved on his behalf. Ld. Defence counsel also sought time to furnish bail bonds in compliance of Section 437A CrPC and next date was fixed for purpose fixed on 24.02.2025. On 24.02.2025 also, accused was not present and exemption application was moved on his behalf and Ld. Defence counsel again sought time to furnish bail bonds u/s 437A CrPC and at the request of Ld. Defence counsel, next date of hearing was fixed for today i.e. 03.03.2025.
POINTS OF DETERMINATION
15.In order to bring home the charges for the commission of offence punishable u/s 489B IPC, the prosecution is required to prove the following ingredients :-
(A) the currency-note or bank-notes in question were forged or counterfeited;
(B) the accused sold to, or bought, or received, from, some person, or trafficked in, or used, as genuine, such notes; and State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh FIR No. 78/2019 PS: Special Cell Page no. 21 of 32 2 (C) when in doing so, he knew or had reason to believe that such notes were forged and counterfeited.
(A) The currency-note or bank-notes in question was forged or counterfeited.
16.In the case at hand, Sh. Arindam Biswas (PW8), Deputy General Manager, Currency Note Press, Nasik, Maharashtra has proved the report Ex.PW8/A. He has conclusively opined that all 250 suspected notes were examined in detail by comparing with genuine specimen note of respective variety with the help of modern scientific instruments and they are found to be 'counterfeited'. Nothing material could be elicited from the cross-examination of Sh. Arindam Biswas (PW8). Therefore, this Court has no hesitation in observing that prosecution has successfully proved the first ingredient.
Let us now deal with second ingredient.
(B) Accused sold to, or bought, or received, from, some person, or trafficked in, or used, as genuine, such notes;
17.In the case at hand, HC Manjeet (PW3), second IO Insp. Anukul (PW4) and first IO ASI Suresh Kumar (PW6) who have categorically testified that a secret information was received on 06.06.2019 that accused Santosh Kumar Singh will come to Delhi between 12.00 p.m to 1.00 p.m to supply FICNs to someone. Pursuant to the secret information, raid was conducted State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh FIR No. 78/2019 PS: Special Cell Page no. 22 of 32 2 at the place of information i.e. ISBT Kashmere Gate. At about 12.10 p.m, secret informer pointed towards a man coming from the side of Tis Hazari Courts who stopped at some distance from slip road at ISBT and started waiting for someone. That person was identified by secret informer to be Santosh Kumar Singh. He was carrying a black and maroon colour shoulder bag (Pithu bag) with him. After about 10 minutes, another person, who was wearing helmet, came from the side of ring road on a black colour motorcycle; they both had conversation for some time; accused Santosh Kumar Singh took out a black colour thaili/polythene and attempted to hand it over to the motorcyclist but meanwhile raiding party members reached there and apprehended accused Santosh Kumar Singh and during this process, the motocyclist ran away from the spot leaving black colour thaili with accused Santosh Kumar Singh. Accused Santosh Kumar Singh confirmed his identity. ASI Suresh Kumar (PW6) took search of the black thaili /polythene from which three wads i.e. 250 FICNs in the denomination of Rs.2,000/- each were recovered and the same were kept in sealed transparent plastic container alongwith black colour bag. ASI Suresh Kumar (PW6) got the FIR registered and after registration of the FIR, further investigation was carried out by Insp. Anukul (PW4) who arrested the accused, conducted his personal search and also recorded his disclosure statement. PW4 Insp. Anukul also seized the mobile phone of accused, prepared site plan. The above two witnesses not only withstood State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh FIR No. 78/2019 PS: Special Cell Page no. 23 of 32 2 the test of cross-examination but they were further corroborated in all material aspects by the testimony of HC Manjeet (PW3). The testimony of above witnesses inspires confidence as defence has failed to point out any material irregularity, discrepancy, omissions or any contradiction in their testimonies.
18.Accused Santosh Kumar Singh was found in possession of huge amount of FICNs and accused has miserably failed to explain the possession of FICNs. It is presumed that he is in conscious possession of FICNs. At this stage, it is apt to refer Rayab Jusab Sama Vs. State of Gujarat 1989 Crl. L J 942 and Shabbir Sheikh v. State of Madhya Pradesh Crl. Appeal no. 162/2015, 452/2015 and 453/2015 decided on 10.05.2018 wherein it was constantly held that possession of large number of FICNs cannot be regarded as a mere case of dormant possession of large number of fake currency notes, but it is a case of active transportation of the currency notes. Similarly, the Division Bench of Kolkata High Court in the case of Sunil Pramanik @ Sonu v. State of West Bengal in CRA 562 of 2018, decided on 22.11.2019, held as under:
"...11. Section 489B uses the phrase "or otherwise traffics in or uses as genuine". This phrase assumes importance in the context of the fact that the term "traffics" is not defined for the purpose of Section 489B or for the IPC generally. The phrase "or otherwise traffics in or uses as genuine" is added on to a string of phrases which results in the sentence that delineates the ingredients of the offence as defined in Section 489B; the punishment for which State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh FIR No. 78/2019 PS: Special Cell Page no. 24 of 32 2 is prescribed in that section. The activities which would amount to an offence punishable under Section 489B of the IPC are firstly, selling, buying or receiving. The provision to this effect in the section is "whoever sells to, or buys or receives from, any other person". Therefore, the involvement of at least two persons is necessary for performing the activity of selling, buying or receiving which would amount to an offence for the purpose of Section 489B. If that be so, an important issue for consideration would be as to whether any activity which falls into the concept "or otherwise traffics in or uses as genuine" could be anything that could be treated differently from selling, buying or receiving or whether the term "traffics"
has to be read ejusdem generis with "sells", "buys" or "receives". It was argued on behalf of the appellant on the basis of the decision of the Apex Court in Parakh Foods Limited v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2008) 4 SCC 584 that the term "traffics" has to be read ejusdem generis with the phrases "sells to", "buys" and "receives from any other person" and that the junction of another person is necessary to accomplish such acts. It is here that use of the word "otherwise" gains critical importance. The word "otherwise" is used to indicate the opposite of, or contrast to, something already stated when used as part of a phrase as "or otherwise". Even when the word "otherwise" is used not as part of a phrase as "or otherwise", but as an adverb or an adjective, such usages are also resorted to, to draw a contrast or distinction. The word "traffics" as well as the word "trafficking" and "trafficked" are used to describe the action of dealing or trading in something illegal. The activity or activities which would amount to "sells to", "buys" or "receives from" any other person, may require the participation of two persons to complete any such transaction. However, any activity which would fall State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh FIR No. 78/2019 PS: Special Cell Page no. 25 of 32 2 within the phrase "otherwise traffics in" does not indispensably require active participation of more than one person if noticeably sizable quantity of FICN is found to be in the possession of that person and such concealed possession cannot be treated as dormant possession. It is active transportation which amounts to trafficking. Any other mode of interpreting the phrase "or otherwise traffics" would dilute the rigour of law. A strict and literal interpretation of the penal provision contained in Section 489B of the IPC does not lead us to any other conclusion. Thus, the phrase "or otherwise traffics" in Section 489B of the IPC would take within its sweep, the action of dealing or trading in forged counterfeit currency note or bank note even otherwise than by selling, buying (purchase) or receiving. Therefore, the word "traffics" and the phrase "or otherwise traffics in" in Section 489B of the IPC are not to be read ejusdem generis with the words "sells", "buys" or "receives"; but ought to be read to understand that activities other than selling, buying or receiving would also fall into the basket of the incriminating factors which constitute the ingredients of the acts and omissions which is an offence as per that Section."
19.Thus, the Court has no hesitation to hold that accused Santosh Kumar Singh reached at the spot to hand over black colour thaili/polythene containing FICNs worth Rs.5 lacs where he attempted to supply the same to one motorcyclist, who was wearing helmet but on seeing the police, the motorcyclist managed to escape from the spot leaving the black colour polythene/thaili with accused Santosh Kumar Singh. Recovery of FICNs worth Rs.5 lacs was effected from the possession of accused Santosh Kumar Singh which shows the intention of the State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh FIR No. 78/2019 PS: Special Cell Page no. 26 of 32 2 accused in possessing the FICNs only for the purpose of trafficking or circulating the same. This is not the case where accused was possessing FICNs accidentally without having knowledge of the same to be fake, therefore, the mensrea is very much established in the present case from the facts and circumstances. In order to prove the recovery and arrest of accused persons, testimony of PW2 HC Vikas Mudgal, PW3 HC Manjeet, PW4 Insp. Anukul and PW6 ASI Suresh Kumar have been recorded who have duly proved the case of the prosecution and also correctly identified the accused and also the FICNs. Therefore, the testimony of these witnesses remained unchallenged. Considering the intrinsic worth of their testimony, this Court is convinced that prosecution has also successfully proved the second ingredient of the offence.
Let us now deal with third ingredient.
(C) when in doing so, they knew or had reason to believe that such notes were forged and counterfeited.
20.In the case at hand, 250 FICNs in the denomination of Rs.2,000/- each have been recovered from the possession of accused. The defence has failed to offer any explanation, leave aside a reasonable one, as to how the accused came in the possession of such a huge cache of FICNs.
21.In the absence of any explanation, the only irresistible inference State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh FIR No. 78/2019 PS: Special Cell Page no. 27 of 32 2 that can be drawn is that the accused was fully conscious of nature of currency notes and have every reason to believe that the currency notes were counterfeited.
22.Let us now deal with the contentions of Ld. Counsel for accused.
23.It has been contended by Ld. Counsel for accused that accused Santosh Kumar Singh belongs to District Chhapra, Bihar. On 05.06.2019, accused alongwith DW1 Chintu Kumar had to board Bihar Sampark Kranti train from Chhapra railway station and they both were waiting for the train but on the said date, he was lifted by police from the railway station and was brought to Delhi by the train. This witness during cross-examination failed to show any train ticket to show that he or accused came to Delhi on 05.06.2019. After the accused was picked up by three persons, he did not make any complaint to the competent authorities. Nor there is any CCTV footage placed on record to show that accused was accompanying him on 05.06.2019 at Chhapra Railway Station. Hence, the contention of Ld. Defence counsel in this regard does not affect the merits of the present case as accused Santosh Kumar Singh was caught red handed from the spot and from the spot itself, huge recovery of FICNs was effected from his possession.
24.It is submitted by Ld defence counsel that accused has been State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh FIR No. 78/2019 PS: Special Cell Page no. 28 of 32 2 falsely implicated in the present case. It is highly improbable that without any rhyme or reason, police implanted huge amount of FICNs on accused and travelled from Delhi to Chhapra, Bihar to pick him up and planted FICNs upon him. Therefore, contention of Ld. Defence counsel is completely discarded on this count. Moreover, in view of the unbreached testimonies of the witnesses available on record, the plea of accused regarding his false implication is without any basis.
25.It has been argued by the Ld. defence counsel that at the time of arrest of the accused, who was arrested from the public place, no genuine efforts were made by IO of the present case to join the public witnesses to join the investigation.
26.On this argument, I am of the view that it has come in the testimony of PW2 HC Vikas Mudgal, PW3 HC Manjeet, PW4 Inspector Anukul and PW6 ASI Suresh Kumar that public persons were asked to join the investigation but they refused to join the investigation. It is a matter of common knowledge that members of the general public for obvious reasons, these days are reluctant to come forward and testify. Merely because, the prosecution has failed to examine any public witness, the other credit worthy witnesses and clinching testimony of the police officials cannot be discarded. Reliance in this regard is placed upon Karamjit Singh v. State (AIR 2003) SC 1311 and Izazul v. State 2007 (IV) RCR (Crl) 315. Therefore, the contention of Ld. State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh FIR No. 78/2019 PS: Special Cell Page no. 29 of 32 2 defence counsel is not tenable in view of the facts and circumstances of the present case.
27.Ld. defence counsel has also argued that no CCTV footage has been procured by IO of the place of recovery i.e. slip road leading to Tis Hazari Courts from ISBT Kashmere Gate. On this count, I am of the view that the onus is upon the accused to disprove the case of the prosecution as prosecution by examining the witnesses has proved the recovery of FICNs in the presence of members of the raiding team. Accused is challenging the case of the prosecution, so, therefore the onus is upon the accused to bring on record such material which discredits the case of prosecution and if the CCTV footage was so important for the defence of the accused, then it was the responsibility of accused to bring the best evidence in his support to demolish the case of the prosecution and if he fails to do so, responsibility to produce the same in court cannot be cast upon the prosecution.
28.In view of the above discussions, prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt its allegations against the accused Santosh Kumar Singh regarding offence punishable u/s 489B IPC.
29.Let us now deal with the commission of offence u/s 489C IPC, which reads as under:-
State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh FIR No. 78/2019 PS: Special Cell Page no. 30 of 32 3 Section 489C of Indian Penal Code 489C. Possession of forged or counterfeit currency-notes or bank-notes.-- Whoever has in his possession any forged or counterfeit currency-note or bank-note, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be forged or counterfeit and intending to use the same as genuine or that it may be used as genuine, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both.
30.Since accused Santosh Kumar Singh has already been convicted for commission of offence punishable u/s 489B IPC, which includes the possession of FICNs punishable u/s 489C IPC, hence, convicting the accused u/s 489C IPC shall be a redundant exercise. Reliance is placed upon V. Govindrajalu v. State of Mysore (1962) 2 Cr LJ 765, AIR 1962 Mysore 275, 278.
Conclusion :-
31.As a cumulative effect of the above discussion, accused Santosh Kumar Singh is held guilty for commission of offence punishable u/s 489B IPC and he is convicted thereunder.
32.Let copy of this judgment be provided free of cost to the accused.
33.Convict/accused Santosh Kumar Singh shall be heard on the State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh FIR No. 78/2019 PS: Special Cell Page no. 31 of 32 3 point of sentence on the date as fixed by the Court.
34.Accused Santosh Kumar Singh has been apprised that he has a statutory right of appeal to challenge conviction order before Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. He has also been apprised that he can avail services of Legal Aid Counsel from Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee, if he is not able to engage a private counsel.
Digitally signed by DR Typed to the dictation directly, DR HARDEEP KAUR corrected and pronounced in the HARDEEP Date:
KAUR 2025.03.03
open Court on 03.03.2025 15:33:14
+0530
(Dr. Hardeep Kaur)
Additional Sessions Judge-02
New Delhi District, New Delhi
State vs. Santosh Kumar Singh
FIR No. 78/2019
PS: Special Cell Page no. 32 of 32
3