Delhi District Court
State vs Atul Paul S/O Sh. Krishan Kr. Paul on 4 May, 2010
:1:
In the Court of Ms. Shalinder Kaur
Additional Sessions JudgeFTC (Central)
Tis Hazari Courts: Delhi.
Sessions Case No. : 46/09
State versus Atul Paul S/o Sh. Krishan Kr. Paul
R/o E143, Karampura, Delhi110015.
Case arising out of:
FIR No. : 611/02
Police Station : Karol Bagh
Under Section : 489B/489C IPC
Judgment reserved on : 28.04.10
Judgment pronounced on : 04.05.10
JUDGMENT
Case History:
1. Prosecution was launched against accused Atul Paul, S/o Krishan Kumar Paul for offence punishable U/s 489B/489C IPC as Sh. Madanlal, Chief Manager, State Bank of India, Ajmal Khan road had filed a complaint Ex.PW4/A with police station Karol Bagh.
2. It was stated in the complaint that six forged currency notes in the denomination of Rs. 100/ each out of Rs. 1,50,000/ were deposited by the accused along with EPF & ESI Form in his branch and he requested for SC No.46/09 State vs. Atul Paul :2: necessary investigations in the matter. The complaint for investigation was handed over to SI Devender Singh who made an endorsement on the complaint and FIR Ex.PW1/A was registered.
3. During course of investigations site plan was prepared on the pointing out of complainant Madanlal. The recovered fake currency notes were seized and were sent to Government Press Nasik for expert opinion.
The ESI form and EPF form along with specimen and admitted hand writings of the accused were also sent for opinion of handwriting expert. Statement of the witnesses were recorded. On completion of the investigations, charge sheet for offence punishable U/s 489 B/ 489C was laid.
4. After the case was committed for trial to the Sessions, vide orders dated 11.08.09 Charge for offence punishable U/s 489 B/ 489C IPC was framed against the accused to which he pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined 10 witnesses in order to substantiate the charge against the accused.
Evidence:
5. PW1 ASI Subhash Chand was posted as Duty Officer on 02.12.02 in police station Karol Bagh. On the basis of rukka received from SI Devender he registered the FIR of the present case which he has proved as Ex.PW1/A, the endorsement made on the rukka by the witness has been proved by him as Ex.PW1/B. The testimony of the witness is unchallenged.
SC No.46/09 State vs. Atul Paul :3:
6. PW2 Sh. Anil Kumar Luthra, Manager of Syndicate Bank had produced the account record of M/s Ujjawal Enterprises, which he has proved as Ex.PW2/A. The witness also produced the original cheque bearing number 896304 dated 02.12.02, self, issued by Ujjawal Enterprises for withdrawal of Rs. 3 Lakhs. In crossexamination the witness deposed that the said cheque was drawn by Sh. Kulwant Singh.
7. PW3 Sh. Lajpat Rai was posted as Cashier on 02.12.02 in SBI, Ajmal Khan Road branch. He had deposed that the accused had deposited EPF & ESI Challans along with Rs. 1,50,000/. On checking the currency notes he had felt that six currency notes in the denomination of Rs. 100/ each were fake which he handed over for checking to Branch Manager. The Branch Manager kept those currency notes. The witness proved the forged currency notes collectively as Ex.PW3/3, the EPF & ESI Challans as Ex.PW3/1 and Ex.PW3/2 respectively. In crossexamination the witness deposed that the fake currency notes Ex.PW3/3 which were presented to him were loose. He admitted that the accused had come in the bank on behalf of his firm M/s Ujjwal Enterprises to deposit the cash.
8. PW4, Sh. Madanlal was the Assistant Manager in the bank on the said day. He has proved the complaint made by him to the police as Ex.PW4/A and has corroborated the testimony of PW3. In crossexamination the witness admitted that the six currency notes which were found to be fake were got replaced and they were deposited with remaining amount.
SC No.46/09 State vs. Atul Paul :4:
9. PW5 HC Mahipal has deposed that he was working as MHC(M) in police station Karol Bagh on 06.06.03. The witness has proved the entries made in register no. 19 qua deposit of the case property in the malkhana of P.S. and also sending the same to Nasik press.
10. PW6 Constable Babu had taken a letter given to him by Investigating Officer SI Devender Singh to State Bank of India, DBG road from where he had brought some documents and handed over to Investigating Officer, which Investigating Officer had seized. The testimony of the witness is unchallenged.
11. PW7 Constable Mansukh had taken some documents from MHC (M) on 14.06.06 which he deposited in GEQD Chandigarh and after depositing the same he had handed over the receipt to MHC(M). The witness deposed that as long as the documents remained in his custody they were not tampered with. The testimony of the witness is unchallenged.
12. PW8 SI Vijay Kumar had partly investigated the case as he had recorded the statement of the complainant Sh. Madanlal. He had seized the ESI & EPF forms which were deposited by the accused in the bank. He had also interrogated the accused and handed over the further investigations of the case to SI Devender Singh.
13. PW9 Sh. Abhimanyu Kumar is the Assistant Government Examiner who had compared the questioned handwritings and signatures i.e. SC No.46/09 State vs. Atul Paul :5: Ex.PW3/1 and Ex.PW3/2 with the specimen handwritings and signatures Ex.PW9/A1 to Ex.PW9/A8 and with admitted handwriting and signatures Ex.PW9/B1 to Ex.PW9/B4 of the accused. The witness has proved his detailed report as Ex.PW9/C. In crossexamination the witness refuted the suggestions that he had examined the documents mechanically and did not apply his mind properly.
14. PW10 SI Devender Singh is main Investigating Officer of the case. He proved the entire investigations conducted by him. During cross examination the witness deposed that he had requested 23 persons who were present in the bank to join the investigations but they did not agree. He had also interrogated the officials of Ujjawal Enterprises who disclosed that they had withdrawn the money from Syndicate Bank. He further interrogated the officials of Syndicate Branch but the source of fake currency notes could not be traced.
15. In the statement recorded U/s 313 Cr.P.C., the accused has denied the case of prosecution and claimed to be innocent. The accused submitted that he has been falsely implicated in this case. He has not led any evidence in his defence.
Contentions:
16. Learned Addl. PP has urged on behalf of State that the accused has admitted that he had handed over Rs. 1,50,000/ to the cashier in SBI Bank, Karol Bagh branch along with ESI & EPF forms on behalf of M/s SC No.46/09 State vs. Atul Paul :6: Ujjawal Enterprises. The Cashier of the bank had detected six fake currency notes out of the said amount. Thus, the case of the prosecution is an open and shut case which clearly brings out that the accused was in possession of six fake currency notes in the denomination of Rs. 100 which he had used in the Bank by depositing the same. Though the accused has taken the defence that he was depositing the said amount on behalf of his employer but it was for the accused to prove the said defence which he has not been able to prove. Accordingly, the case of the prosecution has been established beyond reasonable doubt against the accused .
17. Per contra, on behalf of accused it was submitted that accused was working as a Manager with M/s Ujjawal Enterprises. He used to distribute salary amongst the employees of the firm and also used to deposit the ESI & EPF collections on behalf of the firm in the bank. He had been regularly making such deposits on behalf of the company. Even on the fateful day he had made the deposits of Rs. 1,50,000/ on behalf of the Company in the bank. It was the cashier of the Bank who had pointed out that out of the amount deposited by the accused six currency notes were fake. As the accused was depositing the said amount on behalf of his employer thus it was for his employer to explain about the fake currency notes. It was argued that it could also be possible that the fake currency notes may have been mingled with the cash given for depositing by accused, by the cashier as even after being suspicious about currency notes to be fake he immediately did not tell about it to the accused but waited for sometime. The cashier had passed the said currency notes to the Head Cashier and then they both had SC No.46/09 State vs. Atul Paul :7: gone to the Manager of the Bank, so there is every possibility that the bank Staff had manipulated the cash deposited by accused by raising a plea that it contained six fake currency notes. It was submitted that it cannot be believed that while making a deposit of a huge amount of Rs. 1,50,000/ the accused would only use six fake currency notes if he actually was involved in circulation of fake currency notes. On the contrary, the accused did not try to run from the bank premises after it was brought to his notice that six fake currency notes were detected rather he waited there to get the things cleared and sorted out. Therefore, the prosecution has failed to prove the requisite ''knowledge'' and ''intention'' which is punishable U/s 489B and 489C and mere possession of the fake currency notes is not sufficient. Findings:
18. From the testimony of PW3 Sh. Lajpat Rai it emerges that the accused had deposited Rs. 1,50,000/ along with EPF and ESI challans with PW3. The currency notes were produced in bundles and some currency notes were loose also. PW3 has deposed that the fake six currency notes were out of the loose currency notes.
19. PW4 Sh. Madanlal was working as a Head Cashier in the bank on the said day. He has corroborated the testimony of PW3 and deposed that the six currency notes which were handed over to him by PW3, on checking by him appeared to be fake. The same he took to the Branch Manager. As per the report of Government Press, Ex.PX all the six currency notes which were sent there for opinion for opined to be counterfeit notes as these were SC No.46/09 State vs. Atul Paul :8: slightly thicker than the general note paper, printing ink shades did not match with the genuine note printing ink shade, colour registration was not correct, numbering style also did not match with the style of genuine note and the quality of the printing was found to be poor.
20. From the testimony of PW9 it has emerged that the ESI Forms Ex.PW9/B1 and Ex.PW9/B4 is in the handwriting of the accused. The accused has not denied the fact that he had gone to deposit Rs. 1,50,000/ on behalf of M/s Ujjawal Enterprises in SBI Bank. The defence raised on behalf of accused is that the said money was handed over to him by his employer. The prove the same the accused has relied upon the testimony of PW2 Sh. Anil Kumar Luthra and submitted that the said witness has admitted that on the same day i.e. on 02.12.02 M/s Ujjawal Enterprises through Sh. Kulwant Singh had withdrawn Rs. 3 Lakhs from the account of the company. PW2 also deposed that after deducting Rs.50,000/ by the bank the actual payment of Rs. 2,50,000/ was made to Sh. Kulwant Singh. Besides handing over th said amount in different denominations, 1000 currency notes in the denomination of Rs. 100/ were also handed over by the bank to Sh. Kulwant Singh. It was submitted on behalf of accused that from the said money he was given Rs. 1,50,000/ to be deposited in the bank which he accordingly did.
21. The important question to be considered at this stage is that whether the accused had the "knowledge" or had "reason to believe" that the six currency notes in the denomination of Rs. 100/ were fake and counterfeit SC No.46/09 State vs. Atul Paul :9: and thus he had intended to use the same as genuine. To arrive at the findings of the above mentioned querry we will again have to go back to the evidence of PW2, PW3 and PW4. As per Ex.PW2/A an amount of Rs. 3 Lakhs has been withdrawn from the account of M/s Ujjawal Enterprises in Syndicate Bank through a self cheque. 1000 currency notes in the denomination of Rs. 100/ each was a part of the said withdrawal. Accused is stated to be an employee of M/s Ujjawal Enterprises and had gone to the bank on behalf of the Ujjawal Enterprises to deposit the cash as EPF and ESI collections along with the challans.
22. When examined U/s 313 Cr.P.C., the accused admitted that on 02.12.02, he had gone to SBI Bank, Ajmal Khan Road to deposit the EPF & ESI challans with an amount of Rs.1,50,000/ but he stated that it was not in his knowledge that the said amount of Rs.1,50,000/ had contained six fake currency notes in the denomination of Rs.100/ each. He, however, stated that the maximum amount was in bundles and some currency notes were loose. When he had handed over the entire money to the Cashier, he was asked to wait for sometime and thereafter the Cashier told him that some of the currency notes were fake in the entire amount. He immediately contacted his employer and had asked him to reach the bank.
23. In the judgment reported as Umashanker vs. State of Chhattisgarh 2001 (4) RCR (Criminal) , it was observed : A perusal of the provisions, extracted above, shows that mens rea of offences under Section 489B & 489C , "knowing SC No.46/09 State vs. Atul Paul :10: 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, noted above.
24. In the judgment reported as M. Mammutti vs. State of Karnatka AIR 1979 SC 1705, it was held : Unless there is evidence of any witness to show that counterfeit notes were of such a nature of description that a mere look at them would convince any persons of average intelligence that it was a counterfeit note and any presumption that the accused knew that the notes in possession were counterfeit cannot be drawn and no conviction under Section 489B & 489C IPC cannot be sustained.
25. In the light of above settled law, let us examine whether the accused had a requisite "knowledge" or "reason to believe" that the six currency notes in the denomination of Rs.100/ were fake.
26. PW3 Sh. Lajpat Rai, the Cashier has deposed that on checking, the currency notes, he felt six currency notes in the denomination of Rs.100/ appeared to be fake which he handed over to the Head Cashier for checking who then handed over the same to the Branch Manager. PW4 has deposed on the same lines. He stated that the currency notes appeared to be fake to SC No.46/09 State vs. Atul Paul :11: him which he took to the Branch Manager. Thus, from the evidence of both these witnesses, it emerges that being the Cashier and Head Cashier of a nationalized bank, they themselves were not able to say on scrutinizing the currency notes by naked eyes that whether the same were original or fake, thus, it cannot be said that the accused had knowledge that the same were fake.
27. Under Section 489B IPC, the burden is on the prosecution to prove that at the time when the accused was passing the currency to the Cashier, he knew that it was fake. The mere possession of the currency notes by the accused does not shift the burden to the accused to prove his innocence of possession of fake currency notes. Similarly, under Section 489C IPC, it is to be proved that the accused intended to use the fake or counterfeit notes as genuine.
28. The case of the prosecution is that the accused had gone to the bank to deposit the money on behalf of his employer. Thus, it was the money of the employer which the accused had handed over to PW3 and not his money which he had intended to use as genuine. The prosecution has not led any evidence to prove that the accused "knew" or "had reason to believe"
that the currency notes were counterfeit.
29. It has also come in the prosecution evidence that the accused used to deal with State Bank of India earlier also on behalf of his employer M/s. Ujjawal Enterprises. This was for the first time when out of a huge SC No.46/09 State vs. Atul Paul :12: amount of Rs.1,50,000/, only six currency notes in the denomination of Rs.100/ each were found to be fake. Moreover, when the accused was told that the currency notes were fake, he did not try to run away but waited there till the police arrived. PW3 Sh. Lajpat Rai has testified that till the police arrived in the bank, the accused kept on waiting in the bank and he did not try to run away. PW4 has also testified that the accused did not try to run away till they were conducting enquiries and the police was called. PW4 has further admitted that six currency notes in the denomination of Rs.100/ each found to be fake, were replaced and were deposited with remaining currency notes. The accused has stated in his statement U/s 313 Cr.P.C. that when the Cashier had told him that the currency notes were fake, he contacted his employer on telephone and had asked him to reach the bank. Thus, from the entire evidence, led by the prosecution, it can be concluded that the accused did not have "knowledge" or "reason to believe" that the six currency notes in the denomination of Rs.100/ each amongst the entire amount of Rs.1,50,000/ which he had handed over to the Cashier in SBI were fake or counterfeit notes.
30. To sum up, considering the above circumstances, the essential ingredients of Section 489B & 489C IPC are missing. Thus, the accused is acquitted from the charge as framed for offence punishable under Section 489B & 489C IPC, after giving him benefit of doubt. Announced in the Open Court On 04.05.10. (Shalinder Kaur) Additional Sessions JudgeFTC (Central) Tis Hazari Courts: Delhi.
SC No.46/09 State vs. Atul Paul :13: State Vs. Atul Paul FIR No. 611/02 PS : Karol Bagh SC No. : 46/09 04.05.10 Present : None for State.
Accused on bail with Counsel Sh. Rajesh Narang.
Vide judgment announced of even date on separate sheets, the accused is acquitted from the charge as framed for offence punishable under Section 489B & 489C IPC, after giving him benefit of doubt. He is on bail. Bail bond stands canceled. Surety be discharged.
File be consigned to Record Room.
(SHALINDER KAUR) Additional Sessions JudgeFTC (Central) Tis Hazari Courts: Delhi.
SC No.46/09 State vs. Atul Paul