Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

State vs Mani Karan Singh on 20 November, 2023

Author: Amit Bansal

Bench: Amit Bansal

                                    $~68
                                    *           IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                                    +           CRL.REV.P. 1242/2023

                                                STATE                                                                          ..... Petitioner
                                                                                      Through:                Ms.Shubhi Gupta, APP for State.

                                                                                      versus
                                                MANI KARAN SINGH                                                                 ..... Respondent
                                                             Through:                                         None.

                                                CORAM:
                                                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL
                                                                                      ORDER

% 20.11.2023 CRL.M.A. 31473/2023 (Exemption)

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. The application stands disposed of.

CRL.M.A. 31472/2023 (condonation of delay of 104 days in filing petition)

3. For the reasons stated, the delay of 104 days in filing petition is condoned and the application is allowed.

4. The application stands disposed of.

5. The present revision petition has been filed by the State against the order dated 23rd March, 2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (East), Karkardooma Courts, Delhi, whereby the respondent has been discharged of the offences under Sections 489C/489B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).

This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 22/11/2023 at 22:39:17

6. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State submits that the impugned order is erroneous as it fails to take into account the fact that the respondent was caught with counterfeit notes.

7. I have heard the learned APP and perused the material on record, including the impugned order.

8. The relevant observations in the impugned order are set out below:

"Admittedly, as per the prosecution case, amount was given by Budh Prakash as of committee amount and he visited the bank to deposit an amount of three lac and during inquiries made by the police, he gave his explanation for source of the entire said amount. To bring home the guilt under Sec. 489C IPC, accused must be in knowledge that notes are forged. No prudent person will go to bank to deposit the said amount, if he knew that the currency notes are counterfeit. Except the disclosure statement nothing has come on record which may even remotely suggests that accused was having any knowledge about the counterfeit notes. The accused who was a young boy of 21 years of age, had gone to deposit a sum of Rs.3,00,000-/which he received from Sh. Budh Prakash and in the said currency notes 48 were found counterfeit. Sh. Budh Prakash in his statement admitted that in the amount which he had given to Mani Karan most notes were in the denomination of Rs. 500/- and said amount was also given on 02.06.2021. Amount was to be deposited in the account of his father.

...

With the above observations and discussion, this Court is of the view that mens rea which is required under the provisions of Sections 489B IPC or 489C IPC is clearly missing in the present case and as such, the present accused namely Mani Karan Singh is discharged for these offences, alleged against him in the present matter."

9. The impugned order correctly records that to make out an offence under Section 489C of the IPC, the accused has to be in knowledge of the fact that the notes were forged. In the present case, there is nothing to CRL.REV.P. 1242/2023 Page 2 of 3 This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 22/11/2023 at 22:39:17 suggest that the respondent accused had any knowledge of the currency notes being counterfeit. It is also a matter of record that the other accused in the present case, Sh. Budh Prakash, who was the one who had given the notes to the respondent has since expired.

10. In my view, there is no infirmity in the impugned order that warrants interference by this Court as no useful purpose would be served by proceeding against the respondent.

11. The petition stands dismissed.

AMIT BANSAL, J NOVEMBER 20, 2023 sr CRL.REV.P. 1242/2023 Page 3 of 3 This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 22/11/2023 at 22:39:17