Delhi District Court
State vs Harender Singh Etc on 10 May, 2024
IN THE COURT OF SH. SACHIN SANGWAN :
ADDITIONAL SESSION JUDGE (FAST TRACK COURT - 01):
SOUTH-EAST DISTRICT : SAKET COURTS : NEW DELHI
SC No. 1943/2016
STATE Vs Harender Singh & Ors.
FIR No.: 221/2012
U/S 489A to D/34 IPC
PS : Lajpat Nagar
Particulars of the case
1. Date of offence : 17.09.2012
2.Offence complained of : u/s 489-A to E IPC
3.Name of the complainant : SI Om Prakash
4. Name of the accused no.1 : Harender Singh
his parentage s/o Sh. Chander Pal Singh,
his present residential address R/o: H. No.42, 2nd Floor,
Ram Nagar, Krishana Nagar,
Delhi.
Name of accused no.2 : Sanjay Sharma
his parentage s/o Sh. Gaya Prasad Sharma
his present residential address R/o: H. No. S-9/C-151, Shalimar
Garden, Sahibabad, Ghaziabad, UP
5. Plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty
6.Final order : Both accused acquitted
Date of Institution : 04.12.2012
Date of Judgment reserved on : 27.04.2024
Date of Judgment : 10.05.2024
Ld. Addl PP for State : Sh. Ashok Debbarma
Ld.Counsel for accused
Harender Singh and Sanjay
Sharma : Sh. Sundeep Sehgal
JUDGMENT
SC No. 1943/2016 State v. Harender Singh & Anr. Pages 1 of 24 FIR No. 221/2012
1. CHARGESHEET 1.1 As per the charge-sheet, a secret informer came to the police station Lajpat Nagar and informed SI Om Prakash that one person having fake currency notes shall come to Rampul near Shani Mandir, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi and if raid is conducted, he can be apprehended and fake currency notes can be recovered from him. SI conveyed said information to the SHO who gave directions to constitute a raiding party and proceed to the spot. 1.2 Thereupon SI prepared a raiding party comprising of himself, SI Bengali Babu, ASI Yashpal Singh, HC Mahender Singh, Ct. Rajesh, Ct. Madan Lal and Ct. Prem Punit. After necessary instructions the said raiding party left the police station along with secret informer and at about 12.30 pm they reached at the spot i.e Rampul near Shani Mandir, Lajpat Nagar-II, Delhi. At the spot, on SI Om Prakash's instructions, SI Bengali Babu and HC Mahender Kumar took position towards the Gurudwara road, ASI Yashpal and Ct. Madan Lal took positions on the road between G- II and F-II Block, SI Om Prakash along with Ct. Prem Punit and secret informer took position hiding themselves on the road between F-II and E-I Block and waited for the suspect.
1.3 At about 3.00 pm one young boy was seen coming from the side of Krishna Market on a black colour pulsar motorcycle bearing no. DL 7SBP 1580 and on pointing out of secret informer, SI Om Prakash gave signal to the raiding party by raising his hand on his head and even signalled the said boy to stop. Firstly said boy tried to flee from there but he was apprehended with the help of staff and on his cursory search, from right side pocket of his wearing pant, one SC No. 1943/2016 State v. Harender Singh & Anr. Pages 2 of 24 FIR No. 221/2012 bundle of Indian Currency notes of Rs.100/- were recovered and on checking the same, it was found that there were 44 currency notes of the same serial number 7DS589059 and there were 56 currency notes of same serial number JBA315765. 14 loose currency notes of Rs.100/- of similar serial number 7DS589059 and three currency notes of Rs. 100/- of similar serial number JBA315765 were recovered from the pocket of his shirt. Said recovered notes were seized by the police. The case property was sealed with the seal of OP at the time of the seizure and seal was handed over to Ct. Madan Lal. 1.4 During investigation, the name of said boy was revealed as Harender Singh who stated that said currency notes were got prepared by one person namely Sanjay Sharma who resides at Shalimar Garden, Sahibabad, Ghaziabad, UP and he (said boy) uses the same in the market. Today also he had come to use the said fake notes in the market. As accused confessed keeping of fake currency notes, therefore, offence u/s 489C was made out against the accused. Accordingly, FIR was got registered against said accused and investigation was marked to SI Bengali Babu.
1.5 During investigation, the spot was inspected and site plan was prepared at the instance of SI Om Prakash. Seizure of the recovered fake currency notes was prepared. Accused Harender Singh was interrogated, arrested and his disclosure statement was recorded. Motorcycle pulsar Bajaj bearing no. DL 7SBP 1580 was also seized. During interrogation, the accused stated that he used to take said fake currency notes from one person namely Sanjay Sharma and he can get him arrested. Thereafter accused Harender Singh led the police party to H. No. C-151, second floor, flat no. S-9, Shalimar Garden, Sahibabad, Ghaziabad, UP where co accused Sanjay Sharma was SC No. 1943/2016 State v. Harender Singh & Anr. Pages 3 of 24 FIR No. 221/2012 apprehended. Thereafter, said accused was interrogated and his disclosure statement was recorded wherein he confessed his guilt. Thereafter, accused Sanjay Sharma was arrested and his personal search was conducted.
1.6 At the instance of accused Sanjay Sharma, printed sheets of notes in white paper in the denomination of Rs.100/- and Rs.50/- were recovered from the lower rack of the almirah kept inside the room of the flat and on counting, same were found to be 206 sheets in the denomination of Rs.100/- notes (printed indian currency notes) having different series bearing no. OUG 767244, 7DS589059 and JBA 315765. On counting printed sheets of Rs.50/- notes, it was found that they were 21 in number having different series 6DF767639, OHC664292 and 6DC44326 of Indian Currency. Along with said recovery, from the same rack fake currency notes printed on Indian currency papers of Rs.100/- were also recovered and on counting the same were found to be 382 notes out of which 168 notes were of serial no. JBA 215765, 115 notes were of serial no. 70S589059 and 99 notes were of serial no. OUG767244. Said fake notes were also seized.
Accused also took out from the same almirah a bundle of fake currency notes in the denomination of Rs.100/- and on counting, the same were found to be 275 notes printed on the white paper out of which 142 notes were having 7DS589059 series, 22 notes were having OUG767244 series and 111 notes were having JBA315765 series. Said fake notes were also seized.
Further, at the instance of said accused, from the room of the flat some pieces of papers which were covered with a cloth were recovered. Same were stated to be the cuttings of the sheets which were used for preparing fake currency notes. Same were also seized. SC No. 1943/2016 State v. Harender Singh & Anr. Pages 4 of 24 FIR No. 221/2012 From the table in the room, articles which were used for preparing fake currency notes were also recovered i.e. two HP Adapters, one scanner/printer/copier make HPPSL 1410 All in one and another same printer of the same company, one CPU of black colour of Intex company, one key board of black colour make Logitech with one mouse, one LCD make Samsung make Sync master B-2030. Same were also seized.
One cartridge having written Black Print Cartridge, two cartridges having written HP Tri Colour Cartridges, five injections/syringes filled with coloured liquid, one monogram of Mahatma Gandhi and one aluminum roller with rubber on the same, were also recovered at the instance of said accused. All these articles were also seized.
One ink filled box with Kohinoor ink screen printing ink PVC Superwhite written over the same was also got recovered by the said accused. Same was also seized.
Thereafter, the accused got recovered different ink bottles which were used for putting colour in the fake currency notes. Same was also seized.
One wooden frame with plastic transparent sheet having the logo of Mahatma Gandhi was also got recovered by the said accused disclosing that same was used for the printing of currency notes. Same was also seized.
Two-three packets of white paper sheet which were used for printing were also recovered at the instance of accused. Same were also seized.
The case property recovered at the instance of accused Sanjay was sealed with the seal of BB at the time of seizure and seal was SC No. 1943/2016 State v. Harender Singh & Anr. Pages 5 of 24 FIR No. 221/2012 handed over to HC Mahender Singh. Statement of the witnesses were recorded u/s 161 CrPC. Accordingly, on the basis of investigation, offence u/s 489A, B, C, D or E/34 IPC were made out against the said accused.
1.7 During investigation, the hard disk of the CPU, and the fake currency notes were sent to FSL, Rohini for examination.
During investigation, both accused disclosed names of their accomplices as Abad and Chaudhary but none of them could be traced during the police custody of the accused. Since their addresses were incomplete therefore no further proceedings could be conducted against such persons disclosed by accused.
1.8 Accordingly, chargesheet was filed against the accused Harender Singh u/s 489C/34 IPC and u/s 489A/B/C/D and E IPC r/w section 34 IPC against accused Sanjay Sharma. 1.9 Subsequently, one FSL report was filed in the court on 04.02.2013 and the second FSL report was filed on 25.02.2013.
2. CHARGE 2.1 On the basis of the charge-sheet, charge u/s 489C IPC was framed against accused Harender Singh whereas charge u/s 489A/489C/D and E was framed against accused Sanjay Sharma. Both accused pleaded not guilty to the said charges and claimed trial. Accordingly, prosecution was directed to lead evidence in support of the charge-sheet.
3. PROSECUTION EVIDENCE 3.1 In support of its case, prosecution has examined 14 witnesses.
SC No. 1943/2016 State v. Harender Singh & Anr. Pages 6 of 24 FIR No. 221/2012 S. No. Name of the Nature of the evidence witnesses PW-1 HC Hem Raj Police official who deposited two pullandas containing case properties in the FSL, Rohini on 19.10.2012 PW-2 HC Mahender Police Official who was part of the Singh raiding party and was witness to arrest of accused Harender Singh and Sanjay Sharma and recoveries made from them. PW-3 Ct. Rakesh Kumar Police official who was part of the raiding party and was witness to arrest and recovery from accused Harender and regarding registration of the FIR PW-4 HC Kailash Chand Duty Officer who registered the present case FIR PW-5 SI Om Prakash Leader of the raiding party and also participant in the whole investigation i.e. the arrest and recoveries from both accused PW-6 Ct. Kuldeep Police Official who deposited the case properties in FSL, Rohini on 25.10.2012 PW-7 Ct. Prem Punit Police Official who was participant in the raid, witness to arrest and recoveries made from accused Harender SC No. 1943/2016 State v. Harender Singh & Anr. Pages 7 of 24 FIR No. 221/2012 PW-8 ASI Om Prakash The then MHC(M) who handed four sealed parcels containing case property to Ct. Kuldeep for depositing the same in FSL, Rohini PW-9 Ms. Rishu Registered owner of the motorcycle Chhabra bearing registration no. DL7SBP 1580 PW-10 Dr. Narayan P. FSL expert who proved his report Waghmare regarding forensic examination of 250 GB capacity hard disk drive PW-11 Vijender Singh FSL expert who proved his report regarding examination of currency notes and sheets PW-12 Retired SI Bengali IO of the case Babu PW-13 Rajinder Computer Mechanic who extracted the hard disk from the CPU in the Court of Ld. MM on the asking of police officials PW-14 HC Virpal Police Official who produced CPU in the court of Ld. MM wherein hard disk was extracted from the same 3.2 The prosecution has exhibited following
documents/objects in support of its case:-
No.of exhibit Nature of exhibit
Ex.PW1/A & RC and acknowledgment obtained regarding
Ex.PW1/B deposition of pullandas in FSL, Rohini
Ex.PW2/A Seizure memo of fake currency notes
recovered from accused Harender Singh
Ex.PW2/B Seizure memo of recovered motorcycle
SC No. 1943/2016 State v. Harender Singh & Anr. Pages 8 of 24
FIR No. 221/2012
Ex.PW2/C Arrest memo of accused Harender
Ex.PW2/D Personal search memo of accused Harender
Ex.PW2/E Disclosure statement of accused Harender
Ex.PW2/F Seizure memo of printed sheets
Ex.PW2/G Seizure memo of 382 currency notes in the
denomination of Rs.100/- each
Ex.PW2/H Seizure memo of 275 currency notes in the
denomination of Rs.100/- each
Ex.PW2/I Seizure memo of scraps of rupees in the
denominations of 100 and 50
Ex.PW2/J Seizure memo of coloured computer printer
cartridges, monograms, ink plate and
syringes
Ex.PW2/K Seizure memo of box of Kohinoor ink
Ex.PW2/L Seizure memo of six boxes of different ink
Ex.PW2/M Seizure memo of a dye in a wooden frame
Ex.PW2/N Seizure memo of CPU with key board,
mouse and monitor, two printers and two
adapters
Ex.PW2/O Seizure memo of white paper sheets
Ex.PW2/P Arrest memo of accused Sanjay Sharma
Ex.PW2/Q Personal search memo of accused Sanjay
Sharma
Ex.PW2/R Disclosure statement of accused Sanjay
Sharma
Ex.P-1 (colly) Case property i.e. fake currency notes
recovered from accused Harender Singh
Ex.P-2 (colly) Fake currency notes recovered from accused
Sanjay Sharma
Ex.P-3 (colly) Uncut currency notes and sheets recovered
from accused Sanjay Sharma
Ex.P-4 (colly) Original currency notes and uncut sheets of
fake currency notes recovered from accused Sanjay Sharma Ex.P-5 (colly) Paper shreds and torn printed papers recovered from accused Sanjay Sharma Ex.P-6 (colly) Paper sheets recovered from accused Sanjay Sharma Ex.P-7 (colly) Six bottles recovered from accused Sanjay Sharma SC No. 1943/2016 State v. Harender Singh & Anr. Pages 9 of 24 FIR No. 221/2012 Ex.P-8 Ink container recovered from accused Sanjay Sharma Ex.P-9 (colly) One cartridge HP Black, two HP tricolour cartridges, five syringes, one butter paper with sketch of Mahatma Gandhi and aluminum ink spreading plate recovered from accused Sanjay Sharma Ex.P-10 Wooden Dye recovered from accused Sanjay Sharma Ex.P-11 (colly) Adapters recovered from accused Sanjay Sharma Ex.P-12 (colly) CPU with thermocol recovered from accused Sanjay Sharma Ex.P-13 Keyboard recovered from accused Sanjay Sharma Ex.P-14 LCD recovered from accused Sanjay Sharma Ex.P-15 and Ex.P- Printers recovered from accused Sanjay 16 Sharma Ex.P-17 Motorcycle bearing no. DL7SBP1580 seized from accused Harender Ex.PW4/A FIR Ex.PW4/B Endorsement on rukka Ex.PW5/A Rukka Ex.PW5/B1 DD No.18A dated 17.09.2012 regarding receiving of secret information and departure of the raiding party thereupon Ex.PW6/A & Road Certificate and acknowledgment Ex.PW6/B regarding deposition of case properties at FSL, Rohini Ex.PW8/A Road Certificate regarding deposition of four sealed pullandas to FSL, Rohini Ex.PW8/B Acknowledgement regarding deposition of above mentioned sealed pullandas Ex.PW9/A Superdaginama of the motorcycle bearing registration no. DL-7SBP-1580 Ex.PW9/B and Photographs of above mentioned motorcycle Ex.PW9/C Ex.PW10/A FSL report regarding forensic examination of 250 GB capacity hard disk drive Ex.PW10/P1 Hard Disk Drive SC No. 1943/2016 State v. Harender Singh & Anr. Pages 10 of 24 FIR No. 221/2012 Ex.PW11/A Report FSL No.2012/D-7746 dt. 31.01.2013 of PW11 regarding 1010 currency notes and sheets Ex.PW12/A Site plan of place of recovery of fake currency notes Ex.P-18 Hard Disk
4. EXAMINATION OF ACCUSED U/S 313 CrPC 4.1 After conclusion of prosecution evidence, accused Harender Singh and Sanjay Sharma were questioned u/s 313 CrPC regarding incriminating circumstances appearing against them. They stated that they are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case.
4.2 Accused Harender Singh stated that he did not give any disclosure statement to the police. Accused stated that rather accused Sanjay himself came when he was called after his (Harender) arrest and Sanjay had come for getting him released from the police. Accused admitted that Ms. Rishu Chhabra i.e. his wife was the registered owner of the motorcycle bearing no. DL7SBP1580 make Bajaj Pulsar and he used to ply the said motorcycle and her wife got the motorcycle released on superdari. Accused stated that he was apprehended by the police on Sunday but not on the alleged date which is stated to be Monday. He was not on the motorcycle and it was parked in the parking. He was purchasing clothes for his son from a shop in Lajpat Nagar. He was having Rs.25,000/- all in the currency notes of Rs.500/- each. He was running RTVs for schools. While he was leaving he had a quarrel with a boy near police barricades in Lajpat Nagar. Policemen present near the barricades apprehended him and said boy. His mother in law namely Asha Rani was also accompanying him. He was made to sit in the police station SC No. 1943/2016 State v. Harender Singh & Anr. Pages 11 of 24 FIR No. 221/2012 Lajpat Nagar till night. His phone, money and all belongings were taken by the policemen from him. His mother in law called co accused Sanjay Sharma and informed him that he had some quarrel. The policemen stated to Harender that he shall be in custody for long. Even Sanjay Sharma came in the police station. Sanjay was apprehended by the police but not in his presence. Accused was beaten by the police officers and he was taken to his home in the night hours. It was the function of the naming ceremony of his son the next day as he was about 12-13 days old. The policemen asked for money from his wife in lieu of releasing him and she handed over Rs. 1 lakh in cash and one gold kadha to them. Co accused Sanjay Sharma was taken to his house in his presence. From the house of Sanjay Sharma, the police officers picked the computer being used by his daughter and the printer. Then they were brought to the police station. They were kept separately in the police station. The police officers obtained their signatures on certain documents under duress. They were produced in the court 3-4 days later on.
4.3 Accused Sanjay Sharma stated that only a computer and printer was recovered from him. He admitted that PW9 Ms. Rishu Chhabra was the registered owner of motorcycle bearing registration no. DL7SBP 1580 make Bajaj Pulsar and her husband i.e. his co accused Harender used to ply the said motorcycle. Accused stated that he received phone call from mother in law of co-accused Harender Singh namely Asha Rani from the police station Lajpat Nagar who told him that he had some quarrel and he shall go and see what had happened. Accordingly, he reached there and police officer asked him whether he was the uncle of accused. SI Bengali Babu met him in the police station with other police official namely SI Om Prakash. Both SC No. 1943/2016 State v. Harender Singh & Anr. Pages 12 of 24 FIR No. 221/2012 of them consumed alcohol in the police station and said that he appeared to be rich and they shall visit his house. They came to his house with him but the residents of the building opposed stating that he was a man of good character. They were asking why he was brought by them but they could not answer. SI Om Prakash used foul language against his wife and asked accused to send her to him. Accused held the collar of SI Om Prakash but he was accompanied by police officials and they caused beatings to him. During the said period, his wife along with the husband of her sister went to the ACP, Sarita Vihar to complain against the police officer i.e. SI Om Prakash. Then he threatened accused that he will implicate him in such serious offences that he will not be able to come out of jail.
5. DEFENCE EVIDENCE 5.1 No defence evidence was led by any accused.
6. ARGUMENTS 6.1 Thereafter, arguments of both parties were heard. Ld. Addl. PP for State has submitted that case of prosecution is strongly corroborated by the amount and the nature of recoveries effected from the accused persons. He has argued that large number of currency notes with same serial numbers were recovered from the accused Harender. Later on, more currency notes of same serial number with the original currency note of said serial number were recovered from accused Sanjay Sharma on the disclosure of accused Harender. Even other counterfeit currency notes of same serial numbers and the corresponding two original currency notes of said serial number were also recovered at the instance of accused Sanjay Sharma. Most SC No. 1943/2016 State v. Harender Singh & Anr. Pages 13 of 24 FIR No. 221/2012 importantly, the whole paraphernalia for printing/copying the counterfeit notes was recovered from the house of accused Sanjay Sharma which included two copier/printers, large amount of ink and syringes and even butter paper with the sketch of Mahatma Gandhi for embossing the same on the fake currency notes. Ld. Addl. PP has submitted that even the sheets of paper with printed notes and further the waste cuttings/scrap paper produced from the process of printing such notes were recovered from the house of accused Sanjay. Even rims of plain sheets were recovered which were being used by the accused for printing fake currency notes. Ld. Addl. PP has submitted that from such large recovery no other conclusion can be drawn except that accused Sanjay was into the illegal business of printing fake currency notes. As the police traced Sanjay Sharma through accused Harender and even Harender was having considerable amount of currency notes of same serial number with him, it shows that even he was neck deep into such business of printing and using such currency notes. Accordingly, Ld. Addl. PP has argued that both the accused are liable to be convicted for the offences charged against them. 6.2 On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for accused has submitted that there is no public witness to support the case of prosecution either regarding the raid or the recovery from accused Harender or even regarding recovery from accused Sanjay Sharma. Further, there are various discrepancies in the testimonies of the police witnesses regarding secret information, timings related to the raid, time taken to travel to the house of Sanjay Sharma, mode of travel, the number of passengers and even the presence of other persons at the time of recovery from the house of accused Sanjay. Accordingly, the alleged raid as well as the recoveries are seriously doubtful. Further, nothing SC No. 1943/2016 State v. Harender Singh & Anr. Pages 14 of 24 FIR No. 221/2012 incriminating was found in the FSL examination of the hard disk of the CPU allegedly recovered from accused Sanjay. Therefore, both the accused are entitled to be acquitted.
7. POINTS FOR DETERMINATION 7.1 The relevant legal provisions applicable in the present case are reproduced herewith:
Section 489A IPC provides "Whoever counterfeits, or knowingly performs any part of the process of counterfeiting, any currency-note or bank-note, 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"
Section 489C IPC provides "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."
Section 489D IPC provides "Whoever makes, or performs, any part of the process of making, or buys or sells or disposes of, or has in his possession, any machinery, instrument or material for the purpose of being used, or knowing or having reason to believe that it is intended to be used, for forging or counterfeiting any currency-note or bank-note, 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."
SC No. 1943/2016 State v. Harender Singh & Anr. Pages 15 of 24 FIR No. 221/2012 Section 489E IPC provides "Whoever makes, or causes to be made, or uses for any purpose whatsoever, or delivers to any person, any document purporting to be, or in any way resembling, or so nearly resembling as to be calculated to deceive, any currency-note or bank-note shall be punished with fine which may extend to one hundred rupees.
1. If any person, whose name appears on a document the making of which is an offence under sub-section (1), refuses, without lawful excuse, to disclose to a police-officer on being so required the name and address of the person by whom it was printed or otherwise made, he shall be punished with fine which may extend to two hundred rupees.
2. Where the name of any person appears on any document in respect of which any person is charged with an offence under sub-section (1) or on any other document used or distributed in connection with that document it may, until the contrary is proved, be presumed that that person caused the document to be made."
7.2 Thus, from the facts of the case, arguments of the parties and relevant provisions of law, the following points for determination arise:-
1. Whether the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses regarding the raid and the recovery are credible?
2. Whether the defence of the accused is probable?
3. Whether the accused are liable to be convicted for the alleged offences?
SC No. 1943/2016 State v. Harender Singh & Anr. Pages 16 of 24 FIR No. 221/2012
8. APPRECIATION OF EVIDENCE AND APPLICATION OF LAW 8.1 The first argument of Ld. Defence Counsel is regarding the absence of public witnesses. As per Ld. Defence Counsel, the case of prosecution cannot be believed since it is not supported by any public witness. I have considered his argument.
Though there is no independent public witness to support the case of prosecution regarding arrest of accused and the recovery of alleged fake currency and other material but such arrest/recovery cannot be disbelieved on the mere fact that only police witnesses have deposed regarding the same. It has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Pramod Kumar Vs. State (GNCT) of Delhi (AIR 2013 SC 3344) that "the witnesses from the Department of Police cannot per se be said to be untruthful or unreliable. It would depend upon the veracity, credibility and unimpeachability of their testimony. There is no absolute command of law that the police officers cannot be cited as witnesses and their testimony should always be treated with suspicion. Ordinarily, the public at large show their disinclination to come forward to become witnesses. If the testimony of the police officer is found to be reliable and trustworthy, the Court can definitely act upon the same. If, in the course of scrutinizing the evidence, the court finds the evidence of the police officers as unreliable and untrustworthy, the Court may disbelieve him but it should not do so solely on the presumption that a witness from the department of police should be viewed with distrust. This is also based on the principle that quality of the evidence weighs over the quantity of evidence".
SC No. 1943/2016 State v. Harender Singh & Anr. Pages 17 of 24 FIR No. 221/2012 Therefore, Court has to see whether public witnesses were available at the given time and place and whether due efforts were made by the police to join the same. Secondly, in case the public witnesses are not available, whether the testimonies of police witnesses are duly supported by the circumstantial facts, documentary evidence and whether the testimonies of all police witnesses are in sync with each other.
Proceeding further, PW5 SI Om Prakash has deposed that when the raiding party reached near Shani Mandir, he requested few passers by to join the raid but all of them expressed their difficulty and refused to join. He also deposed that when the accused Harender was apprehended he requested two passers by to join the proceedings but nobody agreed. Therefore, he has deposed that he made efforts to join the public witnesses twice during the raid. However, PW2 HC Mahender has deposed only about the first effort mentioned by PW5 to join the public witnesses. He did not mention anything about the second effort to join the public witness when accused Harender was apprehended. Even PW7 Ct.Prem Punit has only deposed about the efforts of PW5 to join public witnesses when the raiding party reached the spot. He has not deposed about any efforts to join any public witness after the apprehension of accused Harender. Rather PW7 has deposed in his cross examination that at the time of recovery and seizure of currency notes, public persons had gathered on the spot. He deposed that IO requested those public persons to join investigation but nobody joined. Further PW3 Ct. Rajesh Kumar did not state about any efforts whatsoever by PW5 to join the public witnesses, either at the time of reaching the spot or immediately after apprehension of accused Harender. PW12 Retired SI Bengali Babu has deposed in his SC No. 1943/2016 State v. Harender Singh & Anr. Pages 18 of 24 FIR No. 221/2012 examination in chief that PW5 SI Om Prakash made such efforts to join public witnesses on reaching the spot and thereafter on apprehension of accused Harender. However, in his cross examination, he has deposed that he i.e. PW12 (as opposed to PW5) had asked few public persons to join the raiding team but none agreed.
Let us proceed further to examine the efforts for joining of public witnesses during recovery proceedings at the house of accused Sanjay Sharma. PW2 HC Mahender Singh has not deposed about such efforts. Even PW5 has not deposed in his examination in chief about any efforts to join any public witness during the proceedings. During his cross examination, he stated that IO tried to join independent public witness but only minor children were available near the spot. Further, even PW12 has not deposed about any efforts to join public witnesses regarding proceedings at the house of accused Sanjay.
Thus, from the overall circumstances, it is doubtful whether genuine efforts were made to join the public witnesses in the police proceedings.
8.2 Let us proceed further to examine whether the testimonies of police witnesses are otherwise credible or not:-
8.2(a) Facts regarding Secret Information/Secret Informer The raiding party was formed on the basis of a secret information and thereafter the raiding party apprehended the accused Harender on such information. As per testimony of PW12 Retired SI Bengali Babu, the secret information was that one boy dealing with fake currency would arrive near Shani mandir, Lajpat Nagar-I at about 3.00 to 4.00 pm. However, PW5 SI Om Prakash specifically clarified SC No. 1943/2016 State v. Harender Singh & Anr. Pages 19 of 24 FIR No. 221/2012 in his testimony that the time of expected arrival of said person was not told by the secret informer.
Further, PW2 HC Mahender Singh has deposed that the raiding party went from police station to Shani Mandir and secret informer was also with them. Even, PW7 Ct. Prem Punit has deposed in his cross examination that secret informer left with the raiding party from the police station. He even confirmed in his cross examination that as per his knowledge the secret informer never earlier visited PS Lajpat Nagar. However, PW3 Ct. Rakesh Kumar has deposed that secret informer was not part of the raiding party when they left the police station as he was present at the Shani Mandir Lajpat Nagar.
Thus, the facts stated by PWs regarding secret information and the informer are not consistent. 8.2(b) The time/manner of arrival of the raiding party/accused at the spot.
PW2 HC Mahender has deposed in his cross examination that they (raiding party) went to the spot by foot. Even PW7 has deposed that they left the PS on foot. However, PW3 Ct. Rajesh Kumar has deposed that he reached the spot on his motorcycle and the remaining members of police team went there on their individual vehicles and also by foot. Presenting a different picture, PW5 SI Om Prakash has deposed that they left the PS at around 12.15 pm in a private car. Thus, there is apparent discrepancy in the testimonies of raiding party members regarding the conveyance used by them to reach the spot.
Further, PW2 HC Mahender Singh deposed in his cross examination that they reached at the spot at 12.30 pm. PW12 has deposed in his chief that they reached the spot around 1.00/1.30 pm. SC No. 1943/2016 State v. Harender Singh & Anr. Pages 20 of 24 FIR No. 221/2012 On the other hand, PW7 Ct. Prem Punit has deposed that they reached at the raiding spot at about 3.00 pm. Though the difference between timeline stated by PW2 and PW12 can be reconciled but the timeline stated by PW7 is way off even from the facts of chargesheet.
Further, PW2 has deposed that accused Harender reached at the spot about two and a half hours after they reached the spot. Even PW3 has deposed that the raiding party took position around 12.30 pm and the accused arrived around 3.00 pm (i.e. after two and a half hours). However, PW7 Ct. Prem Punit has deposed that when they reached at the spot and took positions, the accused Harender came after about 5-10 minutes on his motorcycle. Thus, testimony of PW7 is going on a different line altogether.
Further, PW2 HC Mahender Singh has deposed that at that time (raid) all of them were in uniform. However, PW5 SI Om Prakash has deposed that on the date of raid he was in civil clothes. This discrepancy further dents the credibility of the prosecution witnesses.
8.2(c) Time to travel, number of persons travelling and the mode to travel to the house of accused Sanjay PW2 HC Mahender Singh has deposed that they went to Shalimar Garden by private Tata Qualis. However, PW12 SI Bengali Babu has deposed that they went to Shalimar Garden, Shahibad, UP in the vehicle (innova) arranged by SI Om Prakash. On the other hand, PW5 has deposed that they went there in two private cars but he failed to tell the model or registration number of said car. Thus, there is apparent discrepancy not only about the vehicle used to reach Sanjay Sharma's house but even the number of vehicles used.
SC No. 1943/2016 State v. Harender Singh & Anr. Pages 21 of 24 FIR No. 221/2012 Further, PW2 HC Mahender Singh has deposed that they were eight persons including the driver in the Qualis. Even PW5 has deposed that all members of raiding party accompanied the IO to the house of accused Sanjay, besides the accused Harender. However, PW12 Retired SI Bengali Babu has deposed that there were only four police officials alongwith accused Harender and the driver inside the vehicle. Even PW7 Ct. Prem Punit has deposed that he along with Ct. Rajesh and ASI Yashpal came to the police station whereas other members of the raiding party and the IO went along with accused Harender to trace accused Sanjay. Thus, testimonies of prosecution witnesses are inconsistent regading the members of second raiding party.
In regard to the travel time, PW2 HC Mahender Singh has deposed that it took them about one hour to travel from Lajpat Nagar to Shalimar Garden. PW5 SI Om Prakash has deposed that it took them about one and a half to two hours to reach there. However, PW12 Retired SI Bengali Babu has deposed that it took them 30 to 45 minutes to reach Shalimar Garden. This discrepancy further adds to the woes of prosecution.
8.2(d) Presence of other persons at the house of accused Sanjay During his cross examination, PW2 HC Mahender Singh has deposed that when they reached at the house of accused Sanjay, no one else except Sanjay was present in his flat. On the contrary, PW12 Retired SI Bengali Babu has deposed in his cross examination that accused Sanjay Sharma and his wife met them in the said flat. He even deposed that she signed the arrest memo. It has come in evidence that proceedings at the house of Sanjay took number of hours. Thus, in the SC No. 1943/2016 State v. Harender Singh & Anr. Pages 22 of 24 FIR No. 221/2012 given circumstances, said discrepancy is way too material to be ignored.
8.2(e) The movement of case property from the spot of apprehension of accused Harender PW2 HC Mahender Singh has deposed that while proceeding from Lajpat Nagar to Shalimar Garden the case property recovered from accused Harender was handed over to Ct. Rajesh. However, PW3 Ct. Rajesh has not deposed about depositing the case property i.e. the sealed currency notes in the malkhana. PW3 Ct. Rajesh has only deposed that SI Bengali Babu seized the motorcycle of accused Harender and he took the motorcycle to police station and deposited the same with malkhana. On the other hand, PW7 Ct. Prem Punit has deposed IO had handed over the sealed parcels of recovered notes and the motorcycle to ASI Yashpal and that it was ASI Yashpal who deposited the sealed parcels of the case property and motorcycle in the malkhana. Thus, it is ambiguous as to which police official dealt with the case property recovered from accused Harender. 8.3 In view of aforesaid observations, number of discrepancies have appeared in the testimonies of the raiding party members. In the absence of any public witness, Court is hesitant to believe such prosecution witnesses even if large number of fake currency/printing machinery was allegedly recovered from the accused persons.
8.4 Ld. Counsel has also argued that in the FSL examination of the hard drive of the CPU allegedly seized from accused Sanjay Sharma, nothing was found regarding currency notes. Rather, PW10 Dr. Narayan P. Waghmare has admitted in his examination that it is safe to presume that counterfeit notes have not been printed from this SC No. 1943/2016 State v. Harender Singh & Anr. Pages 23 of 24 FIR No. 221/2012 hard disk. I have considered his argument. Considering the other defects in the case of prosecution, said fact further creates another hole in the case of prosecution.
9. CONCLUSION 9.1 Thus, in view of the above said discussion, none of the points for determination can be decided in favour of prosecution. Accordingly, benefit of doubt has to be given to both the accused. Hence, both accused Harender Singh and Sanjay Sharma are acquitted of all the offences charged against them. Digitally signed by SACHIN SACHIN SANGWAN (Announced in the Open Court on SANGWAN Date: 2024.05.10 10th May, 2024) 16:34:54 +0530 (Sachin Sangwan) Additional Sessions Judge (FTC-01):
South East:Saket District Court:
New Delhi.
SC No. 1943/2016 State v. Harender Singh & Anr. Pages 24 of 24 FIR No. 221/2012