Telangana High Court
Dangeti Sudheer, E.G.District And 2 ... vs The State, Rep Pp., Thr Sho Jeedimetla ... on 18 March, 2024
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.150 of 2013
ORDER:
The present Criminal Revision Cases is filed under Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C against the judgment dated 24.01.2013 passed in Crl.A.No.91 of 2011 on the file of the learned Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Cyberabad, L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad (for short 'the appellate Court') confirming the judgment dated 15.07.2011 passed in S.C.No.110 of 2008 on the file of the VI Additional Assistant Sessions Judge (FTC), Medchal, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar (for short 'the trial Court').
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 03.02.2006 at about 8:30 AM on receipt of credible information, Inspector of Police (LW-12) along with his staff (LW.8 to 11) after securing presence of mediators (LW.4 and 5) proceeded to Masthana Builders, Suraram and conducted raid on the said house. On entering into the said house four persons were found and are busy in making and printing fake currency 2 notes on computer. Printing material and computer are available in the room. On thorough search, they found fake 500 and 100 rupees currency notes in the said room. On enquiry the accused persons disclosed their identity. On further interrogation they voluntarily confessed they along with one Venu R/o. Bhimavaram, West Godavari District, Sreenu R/o. East Godavari District formed a gang and involved in the fake currency circulation for the last few months. Their detailed confessional statements were recorded in the presence of mediators and in pursuance of confession of accused, Investigating officer seized 500 rupee fake currency notes 176 in number, 100 rupee fake currency notes 1150 in number, computed C.P.U-IBM, Monitor-IBM 14", HP Desk top 3420 Printer, U Max Astra 2500 Scanner, Sun cote screen coating lotion-1 tin 200 gms, Tinner bottle-1 Ltr., Andhra A4 size papers-50 in number, 100 rupee fake currency printed Andhra A4 size papers-20 in number, each total as 300 rupee fake currency notes under process other rupee fake currency 30 in number form the possession of 3 Accused No.2, 100 rupee fake currency 20 in number from the possession of Accused No.3, 100 rupee fake currency from the possession of A-4 under cover of same panchanama. All four accused along with seized fake currency and its material were brought to police station and said panchanama was registered as a case in Crime No.81 of 2006 under Section 489 (A) (B) (C) and (D) of Indian Penal Code and took up the investigation.
3. During the course of investigation, Investigating Officer arrested all the four accused and got produced them before the Court for remand. Investigating Officer also examined witnesses LWs.1 to 3 and recorded their statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Material objects seized were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory, Hyderabad for examination about the genuineness of currency notes seized. Mr. G.Raja Gopala Reddy, Asst. Director, F.S.L, Hyderabd and Mr. U.Rama Mohan, Computer Forensic Expert, A.P. F.S.L, Hyderabad examined the material seized by the investigating officer and opined that all the notes produced for 4 examination are counterfeit notes. After completion of investigation and after receipt of report from Forensic Science Laboratory, Inspector of Police filed charge-sheet.
4. To substantiate the case of prosecution, PWs.1 to 4 were examined and got marked Exs.P1 to P7 and material objects M.O.1 to 20 were marked.
5. After appreciating the oral and documentary evidence on record, the trial Court has passed the Judgment in S.C.No.110 of 2008, which reads as under:
"19. In the result, all accused are found not guilty for the charges under Section489(A), 489(B) and 489(D) of IPC and also under Section 120(B) of IPC. All the accused are found guilty for the charge under Section 489 (C) IPC.
Considering the nature of offence and considering the fact that accused are aged below 45 years lenient view is taken. Accused are convicted and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of three years for the offence under Section 489 (C) of IPC in terms of Section 235 (2) Cr.P.C.. All the accused are acquitted for the other charges under Section 489 (A), 489 (B) and 489 (D) and under Section 120 (B) of IPC."
6. Aggrieved by the judgment passed by the trial Court in S.C.No.110 of 2008, the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 filed 5 Crl.A.No.91 of 2011 before the appellate Court, the appellate Court upon careful examination of material facts before it has dismissed the appeal by confirming the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court against the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3. Challenging the same, the present criminal revision case is preferred.
7. Heard Ms. Radhika, learned counsel representing Sri Chandra Shekar Ilapakurti, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent-State and perused the record.
8. Ms. Radhika, learned counsel representing Sri Chandra Shekar Ilapakurti, learned counsel for the petitioners/appellants submitted that the appellate Court and trial Court erred in convicting the petitioners/appellants and also not appreciated the evidence in proper perspective. Hence seeks to allow the present criminal revision case by setting aside the judgment dated 15.07.2011 passed by the trial Court in S.C.No.110 of 2008 as confirmed by the appellate Court in Crl.A.No.91 of 2011, dated 24.01.2013. 6
9. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent-State submitted that both the trial Court as well as the appellate has rightly passed the judgments convicting the petitioners/appellants for the offences under Section 489 (A), 489 (B), 489 (C) and 489 (D) of IPC. Therefore, interference of this Court at this stage is unwarranted. Hence seeks to dismiss the present criminal revision case.
10. This criminal revision case is dismissed confirming the conviction imposed by the trial Court which was also confirmed by the appellate Court. However, the sentence imposed by the trial Court to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years for the offence under Section 489(c) of IPC is modified to that of the period already undergone and the petitioners/accused Nos.1 to 3 shall pay fine of Rs.10,000/- each, in default, the petitioner/accused Nos.1 to 3 shall suffer simple imprisonment for three months.
11. Except the above modification, no further interference of this Court is warranted with respect to the order passed 7 by the trial Court, which was confirmed by the appellate Court.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
____________________________ JUSTICE E.V.VENUGOPAL Dated: 18.03.2024 vsu