Patna High Court
Ugranarain Rai vs State Of Bihar on 24 August, 2011
Author: Dharnidhar Jha
Bench: Dharnidhar Jha
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) NO.327 OF 2007
Against the judgment of conviction dated
01.12.2006and order of sentence dated 02.12.2006 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.VI, Sitamarhi in Sessions Trial No.604 of 2006/211 of 2006 arising out of Riga P.S.Case No.71 of 2006, G.R.Case No.1377 of 2006.
UGRANARAIN RAI.... .... APPELLANT
VERSUS
STATE OF BIHAR.... .... RESPONDENT
For the Appellant: Sri Aaruni Singh, Amicus Curiae For the Respondent: Sri Ajay Mishra, A.P.P. P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DHARNIDHAR JHA Dharnidhar Jha,J The present appeal has been preferred by the solitary appellant Ugranarain Rai to challenge the judgment dated 01.12.2006 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No.IV, Sitamarhi in Sessions Trial No.604 of 2006/211 of 2006 by which the appellant was convicted of offences under Sections 489B, 489C and 420 of the IPC and was directed to serve different terms of sentences. The appellant was to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years as also 2 to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, else to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two months for his conviction under Section 489B IPC. In addition, the appellant was also to serve rigorous imprisonment for five years and three years respectively for his conviction under Sections 489C and 420 IPC.
2. It appears from the written report of S.I. Gayanand Mandal(P.W.1) that he received secret information that a few persons were about to exchange fictitious and counterfeit currency notes in Sonar Bazar. Accordingly, he formed a police party and came to Sonar Bazar at about 1.30 P.M. and started searching for the man who was reportedly wearing a pink colour T-shirt. He found a young person aged about 35 years bearing pink colour T- shirt standing near the shop of Ram Chandra Sah(P.W.7) and had brought out one hundred rupee notes from his pocket for handing over it to the said Ram Chandra Sah(P.W.7) on account of having purchased some articles from the shop. The informant stated that he proceeded fast towards the man who 3 seeing the police started running away by putting the currency notes in his T-shirt pocket. He was surrounded and apprehended and on search was found carrying four currency notes out of which three were bearing the same serial number 2UP 665322 whereas the fourth was bearing a different serial number, i.e., 2UP665343. The informant stated that mere glance of the notes was enough to satisfy him that the four notes were counterfeit notes.
3. The informant thereafter questioned the present appellant about his name and other details and seized the four currency notes in presence of P.W.7 and one Guddu Kumar(P.W.6) who was preparing seizure memo Ext-2 and submitted his self statement on the basis of which the FIR of the case(Ext-3)was registered. The investigation was handed over to A.S.I. Bishram Sharma(P.W.9).
4. A.S.I. Bishram Sharma has stated that after being handed over the charge of investigation he inspected the place of occurrence, recorded the statements of witnesses and sent the four currency 4 notes for obtaining the opinion about its genuineness or otherwise to the Reserve Bank of India, Patna Branch which sent in its opinion Ext-4 that the currency notes, prima-facie, appeared forged and counterfeit notes and after finding materials sufficient sent up the present appellant for trial.
5. During the trial of the case P.W.1 and other witnesses, like, P.W.2 Shivji Paswan one of the members of the police party, P.W.3 Havaldar Kanhaiya Prasad, also a member of the police party and P.W.4 Umesh Jha, the driver of the police jeep supported the facts along with P.W.5 Ramnarain Harijan and P.W.8 Paras Prasad Yadav that while the appellant was in the process of handing over one of the notes to P.W.7 after having purchased some articles from the shop, he was caught by the police and he was found in possession of four currency notes kept in his the T-shirt which were seized in presence of P.Ws.6 and 7 by preparing seizure memo. Thus, what I find from the evidence of the above 5 noted witnesses is that the recovery of the notes from the possession of the appellant is fully established.
6. It was contended by Sri Aaruni Singh, the learned Amicus Curiae appearing on behalf of the appellant, that might be that the notes were fake or counterfeit but there was no evidence in that behalf because the very opinion of the Reserve Bank of India, Patna Brach Ext-4 was clearly pointing out that it was not legally admissible and valid opinion regarding the notes being counterfeit and was advising the police to send the four notes to the mint at Dewas, Madhya Pradesh for obtaining the relevant opinion which was only admissible under Section 292 Cr.P.C. It was next contended that mere possession of the currency notes is not an offence unless the evidence shows that it was intentionally and knowingly possessed for a particular purpose which are indicated by Sections 489B and 489C of the IPC. So far as the conviction of the appellant under Section 420 IPC was concerned, it was submitted the 6 facts did not constitute that particular offence.
7. Sections 489B and 489C have one common thread running through the two provisions that the person who is found selling or buying or receiving from any other person or otherwise found trafficking in or using as genuine any forged counterfeit notes or is found in possession of any forged or counterfeit currency notes or bank note must be doing either intentionally or having the reasons to believe that the notes which he was dealing in or was possessing were counterfeit currency notes. Thus, mere possession or indulgence of the person in selling or buying etc of notes may not be an offence as was rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant. It could be an offence only when the acts which are spoken of by Section 489B or 489C are committed with the knowledge or under belief on account of particular reasons that the currency notes might be counterfeit or fake notes. It has already been pointed out by reference to Ext-4 which is the opinion rendered by the Reserve Bank of 7 India, Patna Branch that the four currency notes might be forged but at the same time the same Ext-4 was pointing out to the police that the opinion was merely to remove any difficulties in the investigation of the case and for facilitating further investigation and that appears more prominent when the Reserve Bank of India, Patna Branch was recommending the investigating agency that for obtaining the final opinion which could be admissible under Section 292 Cr.P.C., the police should send the seized currency notes to the mint at Dewas in Madhya Pradesh as their opinion was the only admissible opinion as per Section 292 Cr.P.C. The appellant was indeed in possession of the four notes which were seized. The appellant had purchased some articles from the shop of P.W.7 Ram Chandra Sah and it appears from the evidence that he was attempting to deliver the notes as payment towards price of the purchased articles. The four notes were in the denomination of Rs.100/- each and there is no evidence on record to indicate that the appellant 8 was knowing or had any reason to believe that the same were counterfeit currency notes.
8. It was contended by drawing the attention of the court to the statement of the appellant recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in which the appellant has denied the question that the appellant was knowingly entering into transaction of the notes with P.W.7. He was clearly stating that he had received the notes from some one in utter innocence and believing the same to be genuine was using them and had been implicated by any of his enemies. The appellant appears putting his Left Thumb Impression on the statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and he appears an illiterate person. The number of notes was only four. There is no evidence adduced in that behalf that the appellant was acquainted with roman figures or letters and as such could be knowing that the three notes which were bearing the single series could itself be evidence primary indicating that the three notes may not be genuine. The evidences of witnesses show that the 9 appellant was not attempting to dupe or defraud any one rather the very act as been pointed out by the witnesses appears as an act of innocence in which the appellant was indulging into without any intention and knowing as to what was the nature of the notes he had in his possession. It is true that trafficking in counterfeit currency notes is one of the most serious problem our nation is facing, but that aspect of the matter may not be the proof of the charge which is required to be proved by admissible evidence and which goes to establish each and every ingredient of the offence. In absence of the evidence that the appellant had the knowledge and had the requisite intent and on that account he reasonably believed the currency notes to be counterfeit and that too in absence of any admissible legal opinion regarding the nature of the notes as could be admissible under Section 292 Cr.P.C., this Court is of the view that the conviction of the appellant under all the provisions of the IPC was simply not called for.
10
9. In the result, the appeal succeeds and the same is hereby allowed. The appellant is acquitted of the charges for which he was convicted. He is in custody. He shall be released forthwith, if not wanted in any other case.
10. The Court records its appreciation of the assistance that has been rendered by Sri Aaruni Singh in hearing of the present appeal and disposal of the same and as such desires that a single fee of hearing be paid to Sri Singh by the High Court Legal Services Committee, for that purpose, let the first and last pages of the present judgment be made over to Sri Singh.
( Dharnidhar Jha,J.) Patna High Court, Dated, the 24th day of August, 2011, Brajesh Kumar, NAFR