Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Atul Mondal & Anr vs State Of West Bengal on 11 December, 2018
Author: Joymalya Bagchi
Bench: Joymalya Bagchi
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Present:
The Hon'ble Justice Joymalya Bagchi
And
The Hon'ble Justice Ravi Krishan Kapur
C.R.A. 745 of 2015
Atul Mondal & Anr.
-Vs-
State of West Bengal
For the appellants : Mr. Sandip Chakraborty,
Mr. Diptendu Bandopadhayay
For the State : Mr. Arun Kumar Maiti, learned A.P.P.,
Mr. Chittaranjan Ghosh
Heard on : 11.12.2018
Judgment on : 11.12.2018
Joymalya Bagchi, J. :-
The appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 28.09.2015
passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Jangipur,
Murshidabad, in Sessions Case No. 08 of 2014 corresponding to Sessions Trial
No. 2/03/2014 convicting the appellants for commission of offences punishable
under Sections 489B/489C of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing them to
suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years each and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/-
each, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months more for the
offence punishable under Section 489B of the Indian Penal Code and to
2
sentence to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years each and to pay fine of
Rs.5,000/- each, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months
more for the offence punishable under Section 489C of the Indian Penal Code.
Both the sentences to run concurrently.
The prosecution case as alleged against the appellants is to the effect
that Amit Bhakat, S.I. of police attached to Samsergunj Police Station (P.W.1)
received a secret information from his source on 18.09.2013 that two persons
were coming from Bashinabnagar with fake Indian currency notes (hereinafter
referred to FICNs) to Dhulian Ferry Ghat P.W. 1 along with other police
personnel proceeded to Dhulian Ferry Ghat in a police jeep. At the spot, they
found two persons moving suspiciously. They were identified by the source. On
seeing police the appellants tried to flee away. They were apprehended and
thereupon they disclosed their identity. In presence of witnesses, the appellants
were searched and three hundred number of suspected currency notes of
denomination Rs.500/- each in three bundles totalling Rs.1,50,000/- were
recovered from the possession of Atul Mondal and two hundred number of
suspected notes of denomination of Rs.500/- each in two bundles totalling
Rs.1,00,000/- were recovered from the possession of Jabbar Sk. Suspected
currency notes were seized under a seizure list which were signed by local
witnesses i.e. P.Ws. 4 and 7. On the complaint of the P.W. 1 a case was
registered as Samserganj Police Station Case No. 313 of 2013 under Sections
489B/489C of the Indian Penal Code. In the course of investigation seized notes
were sent for examination by expert and report was received that the said notes
were fake. In conclusion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the
3
appellants and the case being a sessions triable one was committed to the Court
of Sessions and transferred to the Court of the Additional District Judge, 2nd
Court, Jangipur, Murshidabad for trial and disposal.
Charges were framed under Sections 489B/489C of the Indian Penal
Code and the appellants pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
Prosecution examined ten witnesses to prove its case. Defence of the
appellants was one of innocence and false implication. During their examination
under section 313 C.P.C., the appellant, claimed that on 17.09.2013 Atul
Mondal along with Jabbar Sk. were going to Ahmedpur from the house of Atul
to offer puja on the purchase of tractor of Atul. Police personnel falsely detained
them and implicated them in the present case. However, the appellants did not
lead any defence evidence to probabilise such false implication.
In conclusion of trial, the Trial Judge by the impugned judgment and
order dated 28.9.2015 convicted and sentenced the appellants, as aforesaid.
Mr. Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted
that the instant case is a glaring example of false implication. The appellants
were going to Ahamedpur to offer puja on the occasion of purchase of tractor of
Atul Mondal. They were apprehended and falsely implicated in the instant case
by P.W.1. Independent witnesses, namely, P.Ws.4 and 7 have not supported the
prosecution case. While P.W.4 is a post-occurrence witness, P.W.7 wholly
denied the aforesaid incident. It is also submitted that there is contradiction in
the ocular evidence and the sketch map prepared by the Investigating Agency
with regard to the place of occurrence. The local tea stall owner at the site has
4
not been examined in the instant case. He, accordingly, prayed for acquittal of
the appellants.
Mr. Maity, learned lawyer appearing for the State argued that the evidence
of P.W.1 is corroborated by other witnesses, namely, P.Ws.2, 3 and 8. Evidence
of P.W.4, when taken as a whole establishes the presence of the appellants at
the place of occurrence and that the consignment of FICNs were recovered at
the spot. P.W.7 was contradicted with regard to his previous statement to the
Police Officer and does not appear to be a reliable witness. Evidence of P.W.6
and the expert's report (Ext.6) clearly shows that the seized currency notes were
fake. No explanation has been given by the appellants with regard to the huge
volume of FICNs seized from them clearly establishing the ingredients of the
alleged offences. Hence, the appeal is liable to be dismissed.
In order to adjudicate the rival contentions, it is necessary to make a brief
appraisal of the evidence on record.
P.W.1, is the defacto complainant and the leader of the raiding party. He
deposed that on 18.9.2013 at 13.35 hours he received secret information that
two persons of Baishnabnagar were coming to Dhulian Feri Ghat with FICNs.
He reported the matter to his superior, namely, Samrat Phani, Officer-in-charge
of Samsherganj Police Station and went out from the police station to work out
the said information. He was accompanied by other police personnel. Prior to
leaving the police station, the matter was diarised as G.D. Entry No.880 dated
18.9.2013. They reached Dhulian Ferry Ghat at 13.45 hours in a police jeep. On reaching the spot, source identified two persons who were suspiciously moving around the area. On seeing them, they tried to escape and were 5 apprehended. They disclosed their names as Atul Mondal and Jabbar Sk. Two local people, namely, Laltu Das (P.W.4) and Rashed Ali (P.W.7) were requested to witness the search. In the course of search, one hundred number of currency notes in three bundles suspected to be fake of denomination Rs.500/- each, that is, Rs.1.50 Lac were recovered from the possession of Atul Mondal along with Indian currency notes valued at Rs.220/-. Similarly, two bundles of one hundred notes in each bundle suspected to be fake of denomination Rs.500/- each, totalling Rs.1 Lac were recovered from the possession of Md. Jabbar Sk. along with Indian currency notes of Rs.200/-. They failed to give satisfactory explanation with regard to possession of the suspected currency notes, which were seized under a proper seizure list (Ext.1). Signatures of the accused persons were obtained on the seizure list. The signatures of the witnesses were also obtained on the seizure list. After seizure, labels were pasted on five packets in which the seized notes were kept. Signatures of the accused persons and witnesses were obtained on the labels. Accused persons were arrested and on return to the police station they were handed over along with the seized alamats to the police station and a computer generated complaint was lodged by P.W.1 (Ext.2). P.W.1 identified the FICNs along with the envelopes with labels containing signatures thereon in court.
In cross-examination, he stated that place of occurrence is a Phari Ghat and there were many persons including boatmen at the place of occurrence. Evidence of P.W.1 has been corroborated by other members of the raiding party, namely, P.W.2, Biswajit Purti who also proved his signatures on the seizure list as well as on the labels of the envelopes containing the seized notes. Similarly, 6 P.Ws.3 and 8 have corroborated the evidence of P.W.1 and have proved their signatures on the seizure list and labels.
P.W.5 deposed that on 7.10.2013 he carried the seized suspected notes from the police station to Shalbani B.R.B.N.P. Limited for verification. He proved his signature on the authentication letter (Ext.4). On 12.11.2013 he again went to Shalbani and brought the report along with the alamats and handed it over to the Investigating Officer. He also proved the authorisation letter and his signature thereon (Ext.5).
P.W.6 is the Assistant General Manager of Bhartiya Reserve Bank at Shalbani. He deposed that on 22.10.2013 he received one sealed packet containing FICNs in connection with the present case. He proved the report (Ext.6) which stated that the notes were fake.
P.Ws.4 and 7 are the independent witnesses to the search. P.W.4 stated around 12.30 p.m. he was having a bath at Dhulian Ferry Ghat. Police called him and arrested two persons and stated that fake notes were recovered from their possession. Police showed the fake currency notes to him. He put his signature on the seizure list as well as on the labels of the five packets containing FICNs. He proved his signatures thereon.
P.W.7 was declared hostile. He, however, admitted his signatures on the seizure list as well as on the labels. He was extensively cross-examined with regard to his previous statement to the police.
P.W.10 is the Investigating Officer in the instant case who, upon conclusion of investigation, submitted charge sheet against the appellants. 7
From the aforesaid evidence on record, it appears that on prior information P.W.1 kept watch at Dhulian Ferri Ghat along with police personnel including P.Ws.2, 3 and 8. They found two persons suspiciously moving in the area. The source identified the said persons. Seeing the police personnel, the said persons tried to run away but were apprehended. They were searched resulting in recovery of a large volume of suspected currency notes from their possession. Currency notes were seized under a seizure list which was signed not only by the witnesses but also by the accused persons. Seized notes were kept in five envelopes, which were sealed and labelled. They were signed by witnesses as well as accused persons. It is argued that the evidence of police witnesses is not corroborated by independent witness. It has also been argued that P.W.4 is a post-occurrence witness while P.W.7 has not supported the prosecution case.
I have examined the evidence of P.W.4 as a whole. He admitted his presence at the place of occurrence and claimed that when police called him, he saw the appellants were present at the spot and FICNs had been recovered from them. Hence, the evidence of P.W.4 with regard to the presence of the appellants at the place of occurrence immediately after the recovery of FICNs is clearly established. He has also proved his signatures on the seizure list and the labels on the envelopes containing FICNs. Evidence of P.W.7 does not inspire confidence. He admitted his signatures on the seizure list and the labels. He, however, resiled from his previous statement to the police and was extensively cross-examined on such score. Hence, I am of the opinion that recovery of the 8 suspected currency notes from the appellants have been established by the prosecution evidence on record.
It has been argued that the place of occurrence has not been established. Although the prosecution witnesses claimed that the incident occurred at Dhulia Ferry Ghat, sketch map prepared by the Investigating Officer (Ext.11 and 11/1) showed that the place of occurrence is at Chaksapur.
I have examined the said sketch map in the light of the evidence on record. From the sketch map it appears that the place of occurrence is near Dhulian Ferry Ghat and the road on which the occurrence took place leads towards the Ferry ghat on one side and towards the river on the other side. Under such circumstance, argument with regard to shifting of place of occurrence does not hold water in view of the fact that the place of occurrence identified in the sketch map is near the Ferry ghat and it has also come on record that the appellants had started running away when they saw the police personnel and were chased and apprehended at the spot.
Hence, I do not find much substance in the argument advanced on behalf of the appellants that there was any shift in the place of occurrence so as to wholly discredit the prosecution case.
In the light of the aforesaid discussion, I uphold the conviction imposed upon the appellants.
Coming to the sentence imposed on the appellants, I find that a large volume of FICNs was recovered. However, the appellants do not have any criminal antecedents. In view of the aforesaid facts, I consider it prudent to modify the sentence imposed upon the appellants with regard to the charge 9 under Section 489B and direct that they shall suffer rigorous imprisonment for eight years each and pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-each, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six months more for the offence punishable under Section 489B of the Indian Penal Code. Sentence imposed upon the appellants with regard to conviction under Section 489C of the Indian Penal Code is upheld. Both the sentences shall run concurrently.
With the aforesaid modification as to sentence, the appeal is disposed of. Period of detention suffered by appellants during investigation, enquiry or trial shall be set off against the substantive sentences imposed upon them under Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Copy of the judgment along with LCR be sent down to the trial court at once.
Urgent Photostat Certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied expeditiously after complying with all necessary legal formalities.
I agree.
(Ravi Krishan Kapur, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.) S.Das/AB Item 112