Supreme Court - Daily Orders
A. Abdul Salam vs The State Of Kerala on 19 February, 2021
Bench: D.Y. Chandrachud, R. Subhash Reddy
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Criminal Appeal No 147 of 2021
(Arising out of SLP (Crl) No 1537 of 2020)
A Abdul Salam .... Appellant(s)
Versus
State of Kerala ....Respondent(s)
ORDER
1 Leave granted.
2 This appeal arises from a judgment and order of a learned Single Judge of the
High Court of Kerala dated 26 September 2019 in Criminal Appeal 1194 of 2006. 3 The appellant was the sole accused in Sessions Case No 192 of 2004 and was convicted of offences under Sections 489B and 489C of the Indian Penal Code 18601. He has been sentenced to suffer imprisonment for a period of five years and to a fine of Rs 5,000 with a default sentence of one year’s simple imprisonment.
4 The case of the prosecution is that on 23 September 1998, the appellant was apprehended at about 1.10 pm in Kasaragod when he was found to be in Signature Not Verified possession of 100 counterfeit currency notes, each of a denomination of Rs 100 Digitally signed by Sanjay Kumar and that he was in possession with the intent of transferring them to prospective Date: 2021.02.22 11:38:33 IST Reason: beneficiaries. In support of the prosecution, among other witnesses, PW-1, who 1 “IPC” 2 is the Head Constable, who accompanied the detecting officer was examined in evidence. The currency notes, as mentioned in the mahazar (Exhibit P-3) were shown to be counterfeit. The expert’s report established that the notes were counterfeit. The conviction which was rendered by the Sessions Court was confirmed in appeal by the High Court.
5 Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the offence under Section 489B requires selling or buying or receiving from or otherwise trafficking or using as genuine any forged or counterfeit currency note or bank note. In the present case, it has been submitted that the ingredients of Section 489B have not been established.
6 Another ground which has been urged in support of the appeal is that the offence is alleged to have taken place in 1998 and that the appellant is about 70 years old at present and is suffering from serious medical conditions. Hence, it has been submitted that the sentence may be reduced. 7 Section 489B provides as follows:
“489B. Using as genuine, forged or counterfeit currency-notes or bank-notes.—Whoever sells to, or buys or receives from, any other person, or otherwise traffics in or uses as genuine, any forged or counterfeit currency-note or bank-note, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be forged or counterfeit, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.”
8 Having regard to the evidence on the record, we find merit in the contention that while the offence of being in possession of forged or counterfeit currency notes or bank notes under Section 489C has been established, the crucial ingredients of Section 489B have not been proved in the evidence. Section 489C provides a maximum term of imprisonment of seven years, whereas, Section 489B provides that the sentence can extend up to ten years, together with fine. 3 9 Having regard to the above facts and circumstances, we are of the view that the conviction of the appellant under Section 489C alone should be maintained in substitution of the conviction which has been awarded by the Sessions Court as affirmed by the High Court. In consequence, the sentence of five years which has been imposed upon the appellant would have to be suitably scaled down. We accordingly order and direct that the appellant shall be sentenced to suffer a sentence of two years imprisonment in substitution of the five years’ sentence which was awarded by the Sessions Court and affirmed by the High Court. The fine which has been imposed by the order of the Sessions Court shall be maintained.
10 The appeal is allowed to the above extent.
…………...…...….......………………........J. [Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud] …..…..…....…........……………….…........J. [R Subhash Reddy] New Delhi;
February 19, 2021
-S-
4
ITEM NO.17 Court 6 (Video Conferencing) SECTION II-B
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).1537/2020
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 26-09-2019 in CRLA No. 1194/2006 passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam) A. ABDUL SALAM Petitioner(s) VERSUS STATE OF KERALA Respondent(s) (WITH I.R. and IA No.5563/2020-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.5561/2020-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.) Date : 19-02-2021 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE D.Y. CHANDRACHUD HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sureshan P., AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. C. K. Sasi, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1 Leave granted.
2 The appeal is allowed to the extent mentioned in the signed order. We accordingly order and direct that the appellant shall be sentenced to suffer a sentence of two years imprisonment in substitution of the five years’ sentence which was awarded by the Sessions Court and affirmed by the High Court. The fine which has been imposed by the order of the Sessions Court shall be maintained.
3 Pending applications stand disposed of.
(SANJAY KUMAR-I) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR)
AR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER
(Signed order is placed on the file)