Delhi District Court
State vs 1) Tej Pratap Singh @ T. P. Singh on 17 February, 2011
1
In the Court of Ms. Kaveri Baweja
Additional Sessions JudgeFTC (Central)
Tis Hazari Courts: Delhi.
Sessions Case No. : 140/09
State versus 1) Tej Pratap Singh @ T. P. Singh
S/o Sh. Udai Bhan Singh
R/o Village Gram Surohara, Post Bahdir
District Mau, UP
2) Anand Das
S/o Lalin Das
R/o Village Sutiar Para Post Office Joka
District Sahebganj, Charkhand
3) Pappu Khan @ Pintoo
S/o Nabiullah
R/o Village Kherullah Pur Post Kataila
Police Station Jangipur, Distt. Gazipur, UP
4) Iqbal Singh
S/o Sardar Karam Singh
R/o H. No. D105, Sector10, Noida, UP
Case arising out of:
FIR No. : 157/05
Police Station : Pahar Ganj
Under Section : 489B/489C/34/120B IPC
SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
2
Judgment reserved on : 31.01.2011
Judgment pronounced on : 17.02.2011
JUDGMENT
1. It is the case of the Prosecution that on 06.04.05 at about 2.30 PM, a secret information was received that one person namely T.P. Singh along with his 23 associates is selling fake currency notes and that he would come to Railway Station, Pahar Ganj on the same day at about 4 PM, where he would deal with one person namely Mishra. ASI Gyanender Singh discussed the secret information with the senior officers and at about 3.30 PM, ASI Gyanender along with Ct. Sunil, Ct. Sanjay, Ct. Arun Kumar, Ct. Krishan and Ct. Bhim reached at New Delhi Railway Station in two private cars. They reached near the entry gate of Railway Station, Delhi and requested the public persons to join the proceedings who, however, refused to join the same. A raiding party was constituted and Ct. Sanjay was deputed as decoy customer. After taking his personal search two currency notes in the denomination of Rs. 500/ each bearing Nos. IBS613919 and 8DL63396 were handed over to him and he was directed to deal with the Accused, representing himself as one Mishra. Ct. Sunil was deputed as shadow witness.
2. At about 4.10 PM, three persons came to the Railway Reservation Office and the secret informer pointed towards one of them as T.P. SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
3Singh. The decoy customer and the shadow witness were given direction to deal with the said person and ASI Gyanender along with the staff stood at some distance from there. At about 4.25 PM, Ct. Sanjay, the decoy customer gave a predetermined indication upon which ASI Gyanender along with staff apprehended the said three persons. One of them revealed himself as T.P. Singh and the others were Anand and Pintoo. Ct. Sanjay stated that Accused T.P. Singh had handed over four currency notes in the denomination of Rs.500/ each to him in lieu of two currency notes in the denomination of Rs.500/ each. Accused Anand and Pintoo also disclosed that they had currency notes of Rs. 40/45,000/ with them. The shadow witness also supported the version of the decoy customer. On taking the personal search, Accused T.P. Singh, two currency notes in the denomination of Rs.500/ bearing Nos. IBS613919 and 8DL63396 which were handed over to him by decoy customer Ct. Sanjay were recovered from the wearing pant of the said Accused and upon conducting personal search of Accused Pappu Khan, twenty currency notes of Rs. 500/ each which appears to be fake were recovered. Recovered currency notes and the original notes which were handed over to Accused T. P. Singh by the decoy customer were taken into police possession after sealing them with the seal of 'JK' and seal after use was handed over to Constable Sunil.
SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
4
3. It is further the case of the Prosecution that during the course of further investigation and upon disclosure statement of Accused T. P. Singh, Accused Iqbal Singh was apprehended and on his pointing out fake currency notes totalling to Rs. 4,78,000/ were recovered. All the recovered currency notes were sent for expert opinion to Govt. Press Nasik. Chargesheet was filed before the court after completion of investigation. After supplying of copies of chargesheet to the Accused persons, case was committed to the Sessions Court for trial.
4. Vide order dated 06.7.06, Accused T. P. Singh, Anand Das and Pappu Khan were charged for offence punishable under Section 489 B/34 and 120B IPC and Accused Iqbal Khan was charged for offence punishable under Section 489C and 120 B IPC to which all the Accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
5. The Prosecution , in order to prove its case, examined seven witness. The Duty Officer was examined as PW4, who proved the registration of FIR Ex. PW4/A. HC Devi Singh was brought into the witness box as PW1, who had received two parcels in the malkhana and handed over the same to concerned official for being sent for expert opinion to Govt. Press Nasik.
SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
5
6. PW2 ASI Gyanender Singh deposed that on 0.4.05 on receipt of a secret information, he along with Constable Sunil, Constable Sanjay, Constable Krishan, Constable Arun and Constable Bhim Singh reached at the parking of New Delhi Railway Station at about 3.30 PM where secret informer met us and was joined in the raid. He deposed that he asked 56 passers by to join the raiding party at the entry gate of Railway Station, but none agreed and showed their genuine difficulty. He deposed that he deputed Constable Sanjay (PW3) as a decoy customer and after taking his personal search, he was handed over two currency notes of Rs. 500/ denomination each having numbers 1BS613919 and 8DL63396 vide memo Ex. PW2/A. Constable Sanjay (PW3) was directed to deal with the said person by the name of Mishra and Constable Sunil (PW6) was deputed as a shadow customer with directions to overhear the conversation of the deal between Constable Sanjay and him.
7. PW2 further deposed that thereafter he along with other staff reached at Main Gate of Reservation Office and at about 4.10 PM, three persons reached there, out of which secret informer identified one as T. P. Singh. Constable Sanjay (PW3) and Constable Sunil (PW6) shadow witness dealt with the said three persons and at about 4.25 PM, Constable Sanjay gave preappointed signal and all the three persons were overpowered by the members of the raiding party. He identified SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
6all the Accused persons correctly in the court and stated that Constable Sanjay told him that Accused T. P. Singh had given him four currency notes in lieu of two currency notes of Rs. 500/ denomination each.
8. On search of Accused T. P. Singh, two currency notes which were handed over by him to Constable Sanjay, were recovered from the front pocket of his shirt. On further search, 20 fake currency notes in the denomination of Rs. 500/ each were recovered from the pocket of his wearing pant. He further deposed that on search of Accused Anand Das, 40 fake currency notes in the denomination of Rs. 500/ were recovered from right side pocket of his wearing pant and on search of Accused Pappu Khan @ Pintoo, 20 fake currency notes in the denomination of Rs. 500/ each were recovered from right side pocket of his wearing pant. The recovered currency notes were kept in separate pullandas and sealed with the seal of 'JK'. The seizure memo of two currency notes handed over to Constable Sanjay and recovered from Accused T. P. Singh is Ex. PW2/B. Seizure memo of 20 fake currency notes recovered from Accused T. P. Singh is Ex. PW2/C. Seizure memo of 40 fake currency notes recovered from Accused Anand Dass is Ex. PW2/D. Seizure memo of 20 fake currency notes recovered from Accused Pappu Khan @ Pintoo is Ex. PW2/E. SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
7
9. PW2 ASI Gyanender Singh further deposed that decoy customer Constable Sanjay (PW3) also handed over four fake currency notes which had been given to him by Accused T. P. Singh which were sealed is separate envelopes and seized vide memo Ex. PW2/F. Seal after use was handed over to Constable Sunil (PW6), who also corroborated this fact. PW2 further deposed that he prepared rukka Ex. PW2/G and handed over the same to Constable Sunil who got registered the case. Further investigation was handed over to SI Suresh Kumar (PW7). The witness further correctly identified the case property when it was produced before the court.
10. Decoy customer Head Constable Sanjay (PW3) corroborated the testimony of PW2 ASI Gyanender Singh and deposed that he dealt with Accused T. P. Singh as one Mishra and handed over two genuine currency notes in the denomination of Rs. 500/ in lieu of four fake currency notes of Rs. 500/ denomination. He also deposed regarding recovery of fake currency notes from the possession of all the three Accused persons and corroborated the testimony of PW2. He correctly identified the case property when it was produced before the court.
11. HC Sanjay, who was decoy customer was also examined as PW3 and he also supported the testimony of PW2 and PW3.
SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
8
12. Besides the aforesaid witnesses, Prosecution also examined SI Jagdish Kumar as PW5. He deposed that on 10.4.05, Accused T. P. Singh who was in police custody lead them to house No. D105, Sector10, Noida, UP where they went along with SI Suresh Kumar, Constable Sunil and Constable Arun. At the instance of Accused T. P. Singh, Accused Iqbal Singh was found present and arrested vide seizure memo Ex. PW5/A. His disclosure statement is Ex. PW5/B was recorded and pursuant to his disclosure nine wads of currency notes in the denomination of Rs. 500/ each and 56 loose currency notes in the denomination of Rs. 500/ i.e. total 956 currency notes in the denomination of Rs. 500/ each were recovered from the house of Accused Iqbal Singh. The said currency notes were found to be fake. They were converted into ten separate parcels and sealed with the seal of 'SK' and seized vide seizure memo Ex. PW5/C. One mobile phone make Nokia 2280 was also recovered from the possession of Accused Iqbal Singh and the same was also seized vide seizure memo Ex. PW5/D. The witness correctly identified the case property when it was produced before the court. His testimony was corroborated by the statements of PW6 Constable Sunil Kumar, who had accompanied him on 10.4.05 and whose presence Accused Iqbal Singh got recovered 956 currency notes in the denomination of Rs. 500/ each from his house i.e. H. No. D105, Sector10, Noida, UP. PW7 Insp. Suresh Kumar, to whom investigation was subsequently handed over by ASI Gyanender SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
9Singh was also brought into the witness box as PW7.
13. The statement of all the Accused persons was recorded under Section 313 CrPC. All the Accused persons pleaded innocence and stated that they have been falsely implicated in this case.
14. Accused T. P. Singh stated that he wants to examine one witness in his defence. However, despite several opportunities, no defence evidence was led and the opportunity for leading evidence was finally closed vide order dated 01.11.10.
15. I have heard the detailed arguments advanced before me by Learned APP and all the respective Counsels representing Accused persons. I have also gone through the written arguments submitted on behalf of Accused Iqbal Singh and considered the relevant case law cited before me.
16. As aforesaid, as per Prosecution case on 06.4.05, Accused T. P. Singh, Pappu Khan and Anand Das were apprehended from near Railway Reservation Office, Pahar Ganj on receipt of secret information. Learned Counsel for Accused persons have argued that secret informer has not been examined by the Prosecution and in view of judgment of SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
10Hon'ble Suprme Court titled as Bhugdomal Gangaram Vs The State of Gujarat 1984 (1) SCC 319 since secret informer has not been examined on record, the evidence to this effect is inadmissible in evidence.
17. On the other hand, Learned APP submitted that the Prosecution witnesses have duly established the recovery of fake currency notes from possession of the Accused persons. He also submitted that the report from Govt. Press Nasik Ex. PX duly established that the said recovered notes are fake and that there is evidence on record to establish that the Accused persons had entered into a criminal conspiracy acquire fake currency notes with an intention to use them as genuine and that Prosecution has been able to prove its case.
18. Learned APP also placed reliance on the testimonies of PW2 ASI Gyaneder Singh and PW3 HC Sanjay in support of the arguments that the allegations against Accused T. P. Singh, Pappu Khan and Anand Das duly stand established on record by way of testimonies of these witnesses.
19. Per contra, Learned Counsel for the aforesaid Accused persons submitted that Prosecution witnesses have failed to prove the case of the Prosecution inasmuch as even the place of apprehension of the Accused SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
11persons at Mark A in the site plan Ex. PW7/A has also not been proved on record. It was submitted that as per crossexamination of PW2 ASI Gyanender Singh, aforesaid three Accused persons were apprehended at the main gate of Railway Reservation Office, whereas point shown in the site plan Ex. PW7/A is not near the Railway Reservation Office. In crossexamination, PW2 stated that the distance between parking and the distance between parking and reservation counter is about 400500 meters and both of them fall on the same side.
20. I have considered the arguments advanced before me and gone through the statements of PW2 and PW7 Insp. Suresh Kumar, who prepared site plan Ex. PW7/A at the instance of PW2 Gyanender Singh. ASI Gyanender Singh deposed in his examination in chief that the Accused persons were apprehended near Railway Reservation Office, Pahar Ganj. He clearly identified all the Accused persons and also correctly identified currency notes, which were recovered from their possession. The testimony of PW2 ASI Gyaneder Singh and PW3 Head Constable Sanjay also establishes that the two genuine currency notes of Rs. 500/ denomination each having numbers 1BS613919 and 8DL633963, which had been handed over by the decoy customer to Accused T. P. Singh and were also recovered from his possession. The fake four currency notes, which were handed over to the decoy customer by Accused T. P. Singh were recovered from his possession. The other SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
12two Accused persons namely Pappu Khan and Anand Das were also apprehended and were found in possession of fake currency notes as per seizure memo Ex. PW2/C, PW2/D and PW2/E.
21. In the light of the aforesaid evidence i.e. testimony of ASI Gyanender Singh and decoy customer HC Sanjay PW3, I am of the opinion that the recovery of the currency notes from possession of the Accused T. P. Singh, Anand Das and Pappu Khan has been duly established on record. Constable Sunil who was examined as PW6, who was deputed as shadow customer has also corroborated the testimonies of PW2 and PW3.
22. Further, the arguments advanced by Learned Defence Counsels that the secret informer has not been examined on record also does not affect the case of the Prosecution inasmuch as the recovery of the currency notes from the possession of the Accused persons has been duly proved on record. Mere inadmissibility of the evidence regarding receipt of information from the secret informer would not demolish the entire case of the Prosecution , as argued by Learned Defence Counsel.
23. Learned Counsel for Accused Iqbal Singh submitted that substance of FIR Ex. PW4/A has not been recorded in corresponding to DD No. SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
1314A which has neither been placed nor proved on record by the Prosecution . However, this argument in my opinion loses importance in view of the fact that factum of registration of FIR. Even Duty Officer PW4 has not been crossexamined. Thus, FIR Ex. PW4/A stand duly proved on record.
24. Learned Counsel for Accused Iqbal Singh argued that it is the case of the Prosecution that Accused Iqbal Singh was arrested and his personal search was conducted vide Ex. PW7/E. It is further the case of the Prosecution lock of the shop/godown was opened from the key in possession of the Accused. However, a perusal of personal search memo Ex. PW7/E shows that there is no reference about the key having been recovered from the possession of said Accused. Rather Ex. PW7/E shows that nothing was recovered from his personal search. He argued that this cuts the entire fabric of the Prosecution and suggest that nothing incriminating was recovered from the shop/godown of house No. D105, Sector10, Noida, UP and that the recovery in question has been planted upon the Accused Iqbal Singh.
25. Learned APP on the other hand submitted that it is not the case of the Prosecution that the key from which house was opened by Accused Iqbal Singh was carried by him. He submitted that in these circumstances the fact that nothing was recovered from his personal SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
14search is not relevant. My attention is drawn to testimony of PW5 SI Jagdish, who deposed that pursuant to the disclosure statement of Accused Iqbal Singh Ex.PW5/B, nine wads of currency notes in the denomination of Rs. 500/ and 56 loose currency notes in the denomination of Rs. 500/ each i.e. total 956 currency notes in the denomination of Rs. 500/ each were recovered. The case property was duly identified by the witness in court. Similarly, PW9 Insp. Suresh Kumar also deposed regarding recovery of 956 fake currency notes in the denomination of Rs. 500/ at the instance of Accused Iabal Singh and the case property was duly identified by the witness in court.
26. I have considered the aforesaid submissions and gone through the record. I find on going through the record that is not the case of the Prosecution that the key of the godown/house bearing No. D105, Sector10, Noida, UP was with the Accused Iqbal Singh. Further, the fact remains that the currency notes were recovered at the instance of Accused Iqbal Singh and were found to be fake. Thus, the mere fact that the personal search memo of Accused was 'nil' cannot be said to imply that the recovery has been planted upon the said Accused.
27. Learned Counsel for Accused Iqbal Singh also submitted that the Prosecution witnesses did not offer their search to Accused Iqbal Singh or his family members despite the fact that admittedly mother, sister and SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
15brother of Accused Iqbal Singh were residing in the premises No. D105, Sector10, Noida, UP. Reliance is placed on a judgement of Hon'ble Orissa High Court titled as Ravinder Nath Prusty Vs The State (1984) Crl. L. J. 1392.
28. I have gone through the said judgment. However, a perusal of cross examination of PW7 Insp. Suresh Kumar would reveal that he has clearly deposed that before entering the house of Accused Iqbal Singh, they had offered their search to mother of Accused Iqbal but she refused to take their search. In the light of the said testimony of PW7, the argument of Learned Defence Counsel to this effect cannot be sustained.
29. As regards the submissions of Learned Defence Counsel that no independent public person was joined in the proceedings, I find that all Prosecution witneses have consistently deposed that despite their sincere efforts, public persons refused to join the proceedings. Even otherwise, it is well settled law hat any irregularity or even illegality during investigation should not be treated as a ground to reject the Prosecution 's case. Reliance in this regard may be placed on the following judgments:
(a) AIR 2001 Supreme Court 142 "State of U.P. Vs Hari Mohan''.
(b) AIR 1999 Supreme Court 3717 "Leela Ram Vs State of Haryana".
SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
16(c ) AIR 1996 Supreme Court 3035 "State of Rajasthan Vs Kishore".
(d) AIR 2004 Supreme Court 1920 "Dhanaj Singh Vs State of Punjab".
30. Sh. R. S. MalikLd. Counsel for Accused Iqbal Singh further argued that there is nothing on record to suggest that recovery effected from the jurisdiction of PS Noida from house No. D105, Sector10, Noida, UP was ever reported to the police officials of Noida and thus provisions of Section 166 CrPC have not been complied with. He argued that non compliance of this provision also renders the investigation as suspect. Reliance has been placed on judgment of Delhi High Court titled as Chaman Lal Vs The State Reported as RCR 1987 (1) 208. In this regard, Learned APP submitted that PW7 deposed in his cross examination that before procceding to Noida, which is in UP, ACP, Dr. Ashok Malik, Anti Extortion Cell had granted permission though admittedly no such permission was placed on record. He further explained that ACP was in regular touch with senior officials in Noida regarding the information. He denied the suggestion that no such fact was mentioned in the statement of any of the witnesses.
31. Even otherwise, even if it is held that provisions of Section 166 CrPC appears to have not been complied with by the Investigating SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
17Officers, however, recovery of the currency notes has been duly established on record, as is evident from the consistent testimony of PW6 and 7. As already discussed above, it has been laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in a catena of judgments that any defect in investigation or any irregularity or illegality committed by the Investigating Officer perse will not thereby render Prosecution 's case untrustworthy that it is a ground for acquittal of Accused. Thus, I find no force in the said argument of the Defence, nor can it be said to be fatal to the case of the Prosecution .
32. Much stress was also laid during the course of arguments on the fact that PW1 HC Devi Singh deposed that four pulandas were found having seal of 'JK' while one pulanda was bearing seal of 'SK'. My attention was drawn to seizure memo Ex. PW2/E, where it is so mentioned. A careful perusal of crossexamination of PW1 Devi Singh, MHC(M) would does reveal that he has deposed that he made relevant entry in the malkhana register as per seizure memo Ex. PW2/E. Moreover, this fact has been explained by two Prosecution witnesses namely PW2 ASI Gyanender Singh and PW3 Constable Sanjay in this crossexamination. Both the Prosecution witnesses have stated that though at point X, seal impression of 'SK' is written. Both stated that it was written by mistake.
SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
18
33. In view of the aforesaid, it is clear that the MHC(M) who merely recorded relevant entry in the malkhana register from seizure memo Ex. PW2/E made aforesaid mistake regarding seal on the parcels and the said mistake has been duly explained on record in the crossexamination of PW2 and PW3 as aforesaid.
34. It was further pointed out that as per the case of the Prosecution , 1040 currency notes were recovered. However, as per record only 1038 currency notes were received in Govt. Press Nasik, implying thereby that there is tampering with the case property. In this regard, Learned APP drew my attention to the crossexamination of PW7 Insp. Suresh Kumar who was asked to clarify about the numbers of currency notes. He stated in his crossexamination that on 10.4.05, they recovered nine bundles of fake currency notes and one bundle containing 56 loose currency notes. He stated that notes were hurriedly counted and inadvertently, while counting it may have been possible that one or two currency notes may have been less in one or two bundles. Even otherwise, the Prosecution , in my opinion, has led sufficient evidence on record to establish the recovery of currency notes from the Accused persons. There is also evidence on record in form of Ex. PX to establish that the said currency notes were not genuine. Hence, the allegations against the Accused persons in my opinion have been duly proved on record.
SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
19
35. However, on going through the record of the case in its entirety, I find that Prosecution has failed to establish that the Accused persons had entered into criminal conspiracy, as alleged. I find force in the arguments of Learned Defence Counsel, who had relied upon judgment titled as State of Gujarat Vs Mohd. Atik & Ors. 1998 (AIR) SC 1686 in support of his arguments that criminal conspiracy has not been established on record. It was further argued that on the basis of said judgment, any statement made by the Accused after his arrest whether confession or otherwise cannot fall within ambit of Section 10 of Evidence Act. It was argued that apprehension of Accused Iqbal Singh following disclosure statement of Accused T. P. Singh does not in any manner establish existence of criminal conspiracy between Accused persons.
36. Having considered the relevant case law and evidence on record, I find that there is no evidence on record to establish that the Accused persons had entered into criminal conspiracy. Further, the fact that Accused T. P. Singh, Anand Das and Pappu Khan were apprehended some same spot on 06.4.05 would not perse establish the existence of any such criminal conspiracy.
37. However, I have no hesitation to hold that the Prosecution has clearly established that Accused Iqbal Singh was found in possession of SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
20fake currency notes amounting to Rs. 4,78,000/ and that he knowing or having reasons to believe the same to be forged and intending to use the same as genuine as there cannot be any other explanation for having been found in possession of such large quantity of counterfeit currency notes, nor any other explanation has been afforded by him. Accordingly, Accused Iqbal Singh is hereby convicted for offence punishable under Section 489 C IPC.
38. Similarly, Prosecution has also established on record that Accused Anand Das and Pappu Khan were found in possession of currency notes on 06.4.05, which have been proved to be fake by virtue of report Ex. PX which they were knowing or having reason to believe the same to be forged and intending to use the same as genuine thereby committed offence punishable under Section 489 C IPC. On the other hand, Accused T. P. Singh, who had handed over four currency notes to the decoy customer in lieu of two genuine currency notes in the denomination of Rs. 500/ each, in my opinion, committed offence punishable under Section 489 B IPC inasmuch as he was found selling/buying the fake currency notes as genuine and he was also found in possession of 20 fake currency notes in the denomination of Rs. 500/ each bearing serial Nos. JAC320707 to JAC320721 and JAC320724 to JAC320728 amounting to Rs. 10,000/ and he thereby also committed offence punishable under Section 489 C IPC.
SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
21
39. For the foregoing reasons and in the light of the above observations, Accused T. P. Singh is hereby convicted for offence punishable under Section 489B and 489C IPC. Accused Pappu Khan, Iqbal Singh and Anand Das are also hereby convicted for offence punishable under Section 489C IPC.
40. Let Accused persons be heard on the point of sentence. Announced in the Open Court on February 17, 2011 (Kaveri Baweja) Additional Sessions JudgeFTC (Central) Tis Hazari Courts: Delhi.
SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
22
41.Accused stand trial before this Court for the offence punishable U/s IPC.
42. The site plan was prepared and statement of the witnesses U/s 161 Cr.P.C. were recorded. The Accused got recorded his disclosure statement and thereafter he was arrested by the Investigating Officer. On completion of the investigations, charge sheet for offence punishable U/s IPC was laid.
43. After the case was committed for trial to the Sessions, Charge for offence punishable U/s IPC was framed against the Accused to which he pleaded not guilty. The Prosecution examined ** witnesses in order to substantiate the charge against the Accused. Evidence
44. Statement of main witnesses. Their statements shall be adverted to subsequently in detail.
45. 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
46. Findings:
47. SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
23
48.
49.In the present case, the Prosecution has been able to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt for offence punishable U/s IPC. The Accused is held guilty for the said offence.
Announced in the Open Court On (Kaveri Baweja) Additional Sessions JudgeFTC (Central) Tis Hazari Courts: Delhi.
SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
24State Vs Tej Pratap Singh etc. FIR No. 157/05 PS : Pahar Ganj SC No. : 140/09 21.02.11.
Present : Sh. Rakesh Mehta, Learned APP for State.
All the four accused on bail with their respective Counsels. Vide judgment announced of even date on separate sheets, accused T.P. Singh is held guilty and convicted for offence punishable U/s 489B & 489C IPC and the other three accused persons i.e. Iqbal Singh, Anand Das and Pappu Khan are held guilty and convicted for offence punishable U/s 489C IPC. Let them be heard on point of sentence.
Put up for arguments on the point of sentence on 21.02.11.
(Kaveri Baweja) Additional Sessions JudgeFTC (Central) Tis Hazari Courts: Delhi.
SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
25In the Court of Ms. Kaveri Baweja Additional Sessions JudgeFTC (Central) Tis Hazari Courts: Delhi.
Sessions Case No. : 140/09
State versus 1) Tej Pratap Singh @ T. P. Singh
S/o Sh. Udai Bhan Singh
R/o Village Gram Surohara, Post Bahdir
District Mau, UP.
2)Anand Das
S/o Lalin Das
R/o Village Sutiar Para Post Office Joka
District Sahebganj, Jharkhand.
3)Pappu Khan @ Pintoo
S/o Nabiullah
R/o Village Kherullah Pur Post Kataila
Police Station Jangipur, Distt. Gazipur, UP.
4)Iqbal Singh
S/o Sardar Karam Singh
R/o H. No. D105, Sector10, Noida, UP
Case arising out of:
FIR No. : 157/05
Police Station : Pahar Ganj
Under Section : 489B/489C/34/120B IPC
Judgment pronounced on : 17.02.2011
SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
26
ORDER ON SENTENCE
1. The Convicts namely; T.P. Singh, Iqbal Singh, Anand Das and Pappu Khan have been convicted vide Judgment dated 17.02.11.
2. I have heard the arguments on the point of sentence, advanced on behalf of all the convicts and on behalf of State by Ld. APP. I have also gone through the record.
3. Ld. Counsel for Convict T.P. Singh submitted that the Convict had already remained in custody in this case during investigation, enquiry and trial of this case for a period of two years and ten months. It is stated that he is the sole bread earner of his family which includes old aged father and two minor children. It is prayed that a lenient view be taken against him.
4. On the other hand, Ld. APP submitted that the allegations against the said Convict are grave and that he deserves the maximum punishment under the law.
5. Having considered the facts & circumstances of the case and nature and gravity of the allegations and after taking into consideration all the aggravating and mitigating circumstances, the Convict T.P. Singh is sentenced for offence punishable U/s 489B IPC to Rigorous Imprisonment for three years, in addition to payment of fine of Rs.5000/, in default whereof, he shall under go Simple Imprisonment for six months. Convict T.P. Singh is also SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
27sentenced for offence punishable U/s 489C IPC to Rigorous Imprisonment for three years, in addition to payment of fine of Rs.5000/, in default whereof, he shall under go Simple Imprisonment for six months. Both the sentences shall run concurrently. Benefit of Section 428 CrPC be given to the Convict.
6. Ld. Counsel appearing for Convict Iqbal Singh submitted that the Convict had already remained in custody in this case for a period of one month. A prayer for releasing him on Probation has been made on the ground that the Convict is not involved in any other case and that he has remained in present in the Court throughout the trial. Ld. Counsel relied upon the judgment reported as State of Karnataka Vs. Muddappa 2000 I AD (SC) 379 in support of his argument for releasing the Convict Iqbal Singh on Probation. It is also argued that he has an old mother to support. It is prayed that a lenient view be taken against him.
7. On the other hand, Ld. APP submitted that a recovery of fake currency notes of Rs.4,78,000/ was effected from the possession of the said Convict and it is not a fit case where he should be treated leniently.
8. I have considered the submissions made and the relevant case law. However, having regard to the large amount of counterfeit currency notes recovered from the possession of the Convict, I am not inclined to grant him the benefit of Probation. The recovery of such large quantify of counterfeit SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
28currency notes itself indicates that it could have an adverse bearing on the economy of the country and such a case does not deserve any lenient view. The request for releasing him on Probation is accordingly declined.
9. Having considered the facts & circumstances of the case and nature and gravity of the allegations and after taking into consideration all the aggravating and mitigating circumstances, the Convict Iqbal Singh is sentenced for offence punishable U/s 489C IPC to Rigorous Imprisonment for three years, in addition to payment of fine of Rs.10,000/, in default whereof, he shall under go Simple Imprisonment for six months. Benefit of Section 428 CrPC be given to the Convict.
10. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of Convict Anand Dass submitted that he has already remained in custody for a period of two years and seven months during investigation, enquiry and trial of the case. A prayer for lenient view is made.
11. Having considered the facts & circumstances of the case and nature and gravity of the allegations and after taking into consideration all the aggravating and mitigating circumstances, the Convict Anand Das is sentenced for offence punishable U/s 489C IPC to Rigorous Imprisonment for three years, in addition to payment of fine of Rs.5,000/, in default whereof, he shall under go Simple Imprisonment for six months. Benefit of Section 428 CrPC be given to the Convict.
SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
29
12. As regards Convict Pappu Khan, Ld. Legal Aid Counsel appearing on his behalf submitted that he has already remained in custody for the period from 06.04.05 to 22.12.08. He is not a previous convict, he has a family to support and that there is no previous conviction. A prayer for taking lenient view is made.
13. I have considered the submissions made. Keeping in view the fact that the Convict has already remained in custody during the proceedings of this case for the aforesaid period, Convict Pappu Khan is sentenced for offence punishable U/s 489C IPC to Imprisonment for the period already undergone by him in custody in this case. However, he is directed to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/, in default whereof he shall undergo Simple Imprisonment for six months. Copies of the Judgment and the order on sentence be given free of cost to all the convicts. File be con signed to Record Room. Announced in the Open Court On 21.02.2011.
(Kaveri Baweja) Additional Sessions JudgeFTC (Central) Tis Hazari Courts: Delhi.
SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
30State Vs Tej Pratap Singh etc. FIR No. 157/05 PS : Pahar Ganj SC No. : 140/09 21.02.11.
3 PM.
Present : Sh. Rakesh Mehta, Learned APP for State.
All the four Convicts in person.
Sh. Zafar Abbas Counsel for accused Tej Pratap Singh. Sh. R.S. Malik Counsel for accused Iqbal.
Ms. Kirandeep - Counsel for accused Pappu Khan and Anand Dass. Vide Order on Sentence announced of even date on separate sheets, Convict T.P. Singh is sentenced for offence punishable U/s 489B IPC to Rigorous Imprisonment for three years, in addition to payment of fine of Rs.5000/, in default whereof, he shall under go Simple Imprisonment for six months. Convict T.P. Singh is also sentenced for offence punishable U/s 489C IPC to Rigorous Imprisonment for three years, in addition to payment of fine of Rs.5000/, in default whereof, he shall under go Simple Imprisonment for six months. Both the sentences shall run concurrently.
Convict Iqbal Singh is sentenced for offence punishable U/s 489C IPC to Rigorous Imprisonment for three years, in addition to payment of fine of Rs.10,000/, in default whereof, he shall under go Simple Imprisonment for six months.
SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
31Convict Anand Das is sentenced for offence punishable U/s 489C IPC to Rigorous Imprisonment for three years, in addition to payment of fine of Rs.5,000/, in default whereof, he shall under go Simple Imprisonment for six months.
Convict Pappu Khan is sentenced for offence punishable U/s 489C IPC to Imprisonment for the period already undergone by him in custody in this case. However, he is directed to pay a fine of Rs.5000/, in default whereof he shall undergo Simple Imprisonment for six months.
Benefit of Section 428 CrPC be given to Convicts T.P. Singh, Iqbal Singh and Anand Das.
Copies of the Judgment and the order on sentence be given free of cost to all the convicts.
At this stage, an application U/s 389(3) CrPC moved on behalf of Convict Iqbal Singh for suspension of sentence and for grant of bail till the filing of Appeal.
Heard. The Convict Iqbal Singh is admitted to bail on furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/ with one surety in the like amount till 60 days from today or till filing of appeal whichever is earlier.
Reader has reported that fine has been deposited by Convict Iqbal Singh. Bail bond furnished and accepted.
Convict Anand Das and T.P. Singh have deposited the fine amount imposed upon them. However, they have not moved any application for suspension of sentence and for grant of bail till filing of Appeal. They be taken into custody.
SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.
32It has been reported that Convict Pappu Khan has not deposited the fine of Rs.5000/ imposed upon him. He be also taken into custody.
File be consigned to Record Room.
(Kaveri Baweja) Additional Sessions JudgeFTC (Central) Tis Hazari Courts: Delhi.
SC: 140/09 State vs. T. P. Singh & Anrs.