Delhi District Court
Dennis Councle Mcg Dautha vs State Of California (402 Us 183: 28 on 4 August, 2009
IN THE COURT OF SH. SATINDER KUMAR GAUTAM,
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE( WEST-04) , DELHI.
SC NO. 155/1/09
State
Versus
Dharamjeet Verma
S/o Sant Ram Verma,
R/o Village Sarayanamu,
P.S. Ronahi, Distt. Faizabad,
U.P.
(i)Case arising out of FIR No. 81/2008
U/S: 489B/489C IPC
P.S. Kotwali
(ii) Date of FIR 07/05/08
(iii) Date of Institution 10/08/08
(iv) Date of Final Arguments 29.7.2009
(v) Judgment reserved on 31.7.2009
(iv) Date of judgment 03/08/09
JUDGMENT
The accused Dharamjeet S/o Sant Ram Verma has been facing trial on the allegation that on 7.5.2008, at Chandni Chowk Market near Shish Ganj Gurdwara, he was found trafficking in circulation of counterfeit currency note of denomination of Rs. 500/- knowingly and having reasons to believe the same to be a fake currency note and 39 fake currency note of Rs. 500/- also recovered from the shocks of accused and thereby committed offence u/s 489B and 489C of IPC.
Contd..........
/2/ The allegation against the accused are that complainant Deepak Kumar lodged the FIR against the accused with the allegation that he was doing the business of selling purse in Chandni Chowk Market. On 7.5.08 he was selling the purses in Chandni Chowk market at about 5.15 p.m. one young customer came to him for purchasing the purse and he took a purse from him for Rs. 65/- and gave him a note of Rs. 500/-. After seeing the said currency note of Rs. 500/- he felt some doubt that the note was fake, thereafter, he requested the said customer to wait for some time and with the pretext of changing the said note PW Deepak went away from that place. In the meantime SI Subhash Meena alongwith Ct. Lokesh met him there and gave the said note to him stating that it was given to him by a person for purchasing the purse and thereafter they all came to the said customer whose name was known as Dharamjit Verma, The number of the said note of Rs. 500/- given to PW Deepak by the accused Dharamjit Verma was 9AD 472019. The accused was apprehended by the police and his search was conducted and from the socks worn by the accused 39 fake notes of Rs. 500/- each were recovered and from the pocket of pant genuine Rs. 4340/- were recovered. Statement of PW Deepak was recorded vide Ex. PW1/A. The purse purchased by the accused alongwith the fake currency notes and genuine notes were taken into possession vide seizure memo Ex. PW1/B. Contd..........
/3/ The details of the 39 fake notes was mentioned by the IO in the seizure memo Ex. PW1/B. The 40 fake notes in total were kept in a transparent polythene by the IO and it was sealed with the seal of SM and was given mark A. The genuine Rs. 4340/- were also kept in transparent polythene and was sealed with the seal of SM and was given mark B. The purse purchased by the accused was also kept in a transparent polythene and sealed with the seal of SM and was given mark C. On the basis of statement of Deepak Kumar rukka prepared and FIR was registered. Accused was apprehended, necessary documents were prepared and after completion of the investigation challan was filed in the court. The prima facie case has been made out as such charge u/s 489B and 489C IPC was framed vide order dated 5.11.2008 for which accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
In order to prove the allegation against the accused , prosecution examined PW1 Deepak Kumar who deposed in his examination the story as discussed in the preceding part of the judgment. He also cross examined by defence counsel and in his cross examination deposed that he used to sale purse etc. at pavement at Shish Ganj Gurdwara Ch. Chowk. On 07.05.2008 he was selling the purse near the said Gurdwara he was standing near Vrandah of the said Gurdwara. He was standing in the Gurdwara.
Contd..........
/4/ Which on the footpath he was in the said business since last twelve years the accused Dharamjeet came to him towards Lal Qila accused Dharamjeet did not bargain to purchase the said purse. He gave him rupees five hundred note. Two or three persons were also purchasing the purse and they also purchased the purse. One of the person give him hundred rupees note. He doubted upon the currency note of five hundred as same was new and thick .
PW1 has further deposed in his cross examination that he have intention to complaint to the police post at Fawara chowki . The chowki is situated across the road where he was standing. His father was alongwith him and he left his father at the spot and did not tell the facts in respect of the fake note to his father at that time but later on When he came back and narrated the said facts. He admitted that he did not told the Police that his father is also with him at footpath. He shown the said currency note to the said police official and they came with him to inquired the matter. Dharamjeet did not tried to run away after seen the Police officials . The search of accused was conducted at police chowki and found Rs. 4340/- from the possession accused. The said note was found in the right pocket of the pant of the accused. Apart from that 39 fake currency notes of Rs. 500 were also found in possession of accused and was recovered from his left side shock. On the same day at about 8 pm he was called by the SI Subhash Contd..........
/5/ Meena and took his signatures on some papers and disclosure statement also recorded. PW1 further deposed in his cross examination that the said currency notes were seized at about 8 pm when he again visited to the P.S and at that time only , he , SI Subhash Meena , Ct. Lokesh and accused Dharamjeet were present at the P.S and rest of the suggestion were denied by PW1.
PW2 Santosh is a salesman at Shop NO. 44 M/s Munim & Sons, Opposite SBI Bank, Chandni Chowk, Delhi. He has also corroborated the t he version of PW1 as has been discussed in preceding party of the judgment as has been deposed by PW1 Deepak and has also deposed that the fake currency notes were recovered from the possession of accused. During cross examination the suggestion made by defence counsel has been denied and reagitated the deposition as made in the examination in chief.
PW3 Dharmender Kumar Gupta has also corroborated the statement made by PW1 Deepak and PW2 Santosh and in his cross examination deposed that at that time no other public person was present in the shop. He cannot tell the time when the shirts were purchased by the accused. He is the salesman in the shop. S.P. Gupta is his father and owner of the shop. Accused was wearing one shirt which he had sold to him.
Contd..........
/6/ Accused has come to his shop again alongwith police official . He do not know which one of the two notes was given by the accused and rest of the suggestion were denied by the witness.
The other witnesses HC Shyam Singh is MHC(M) and deposed about deposition of two envelope vide entry NO. 3937 of register NO. 19 and after that same were sent to FSL Rohini on 17.6.2008 through Ct. Dinesh vide R/C No. 11/21 and proved the copy of entry vide Ex. PW4/A and copy of road certificate vide Ex. PW4/B. PW2 Ct. Dinesh Kumar has deposed about taking of sealed Pullanda to FSL Rohini vide R/C No. 11/21 on 17.6.2008 and PW5 HC Shri Bhagwan being posted as Duty Officer in the P.S. Kotwali has depose about registration of the case vide FIR No. 81/08 on rukka sent by SI Subhash and proved the copy of FIR vide Ex. PW5/A and his endorsement on the rukka vide Ex. PW5/B. After closer of the prosecution evidence, statement of accused was recorded, wherein he denied all the incriminating evidence and deposed that he has been falsely implicated in this case and request for taking a lenient view in the matter and has filed an application Ex. PX bears his signatures at point A. Contd..........
/7/ I have heard the submissions of Ld. APP for state and defence counsel and also gone through the material placed on record.
Ld. APP for state submitted that all the material witnesses examined have proved the case property as fake and counterfeit by oral and documentary evidence. He further stated that accused himself has admitted the possession of fake currency notes hence, the question of proving the recovery from the accused Dharamjeet does not disputed. The FSL report to this effect has also been received which also corroborated the prosecution story. Under these circumstances, the deposition of prosecution witnesses and the documents prepared during the course of investigation are consistent, reliable and trustworthy. Therefore, the accused is liable to be convicted for the charges as leveled against the accused Dharamjeet.
The counsel for the accused submitted that the accused belongs to a very poor family and remained in J/C for about 6 months. He does not know how the counterfeit currency notes came in his possession. The fact of fake/counterfeit currency notes revealed later on when the police has apprehended him and after received the report from FSL. Therefore, counsel for the accused prayed for lenient view. It is further submitted that the offence punishable u/s 489 B does not attract within the ingredients as Contd..........
/8/ produced by the prosecution, at the most the accused can be booked and convicted for the offence punishable u/s 489 C. Having heard the submission of the Ld. APP for state and counsel for the accused and carefully gone through the material placed on record.
For the purpose of attracting the provision of section 489B and 489C, the prosecution has to prove the 'Mens rea' of offences under sections 489B and 489C is "knowing or having reason to believe the currency notes or bank notes are forged or counterfeit". Without the aforementioned mens rea selling, buying or receiving from another person or otherwise trafficking in or using as genuine forged or counterfeit currency notes or bank notes, is not enough to constitute offence under section 489B IPC. So also possessing or even intending to use any forged or counterfeit currency notes or bank notes is not sufficient to make out a case under section 489C in absence of the 'mens rea'. In case titled as Punnusamy Vs State 1997 SCC (Cri)217 it is observed that "when the charge against the accused is that he purchased paddy from a peasant on payment of forged currency notes and could not explain where from he received such forged currency notes and remained silent on that point in trial court, the prosecution case against him is strengthened by his silence and not offering Contd..........
/9/ any explanation as to how he got such forged currency notes. So he is guilty u/s 489B for using forged currency notes as genuine."
Suspicions whether the notes were genuine will not amount to sufficient cause to believe. The word 'believe' is a very much stronger word than 'suspect' and it involves the necessity of showing that the circumstances were such that a reasonable man must have felt convinced in his mind that the note with which he was dealing was a forged one, and it was not sufficient to show that the accused was careless or he had reason to suspect or that he did not make sufficient enquiry to ascertain the fact. When therefore, a person in the usual course of business gets a currency note which he finds to be suspicious and tried to get rid of it, he would not be guilty either under section 489B or 489C as observed in Hamid Ali AIR 1961 Trip 46: 1961 2 Cri LJ 801 (Tripura). The collateral circumstances, such as, the bulk of the fake currency notes, the mixture of fake currency notes, the palming off of such notes quickly and the fact that the accused, by no stretch of imagination, could be said to be a layman or an uneducated man, are sufficient to infer that the accused had reason to believe that the currency notes with him were fake or counterfeit.
Contd..........
/10/ The prosecution must prove :-
(i) That the currency note or bank note in question was forged or counterfeit.
(ii) That the accused was in possession of it.
(ii) That he at the time of his possession knew or had reason to believe that it was forged or counterfeit.
(iii) That he intended to use it as genuine or that it might be used as genuine.
The onus lies on the prosecution to prove circumstances which lead clearly, indubitably and irresistibly to the inference that the accused had the intention to foist the notes on the public. Such intention can be proved by collateral circumstances such as that the accused had palmed off such notes before or that he was in possession of such and similar notes in such large numbers that his possession for any other purpose is inexplicable. The similar view has been observed in case titled as Bur Singh AIR 1931 Lah
24. In the present case, the prosecution witnesses have given their deposition in the straightway to put the allegations upon the accused. After getting the recovery of counterfeit currency notes, the same were sent to FSL Contd..........
/11/ for the expert opinion where from the expert opinion also received which also inferred the guilt of the accused. The oral testimony is being corroborated with the documentary evidence and an expert opinion which also jewel by admission of the accused in his statement u/s 313 Cr.P.C. It is a fact that there is no customer from whom the currency notes were being using and the prosecution has lose their influence to apprehend the persons who prepared and procured the fake currency notes. In case titled as 1989 All. APP. Cases 229 (234) "Where the accused was found in possession of forged currency notes and though he did not sell or commit any other act constituting an offence u/s 489B, his possession of such large number of counterfeit currency note at the time of his arrest gives rise to reasonable inference that the accused intended to use the counterfeit notes as genuine. He thus committed an offence punishable under section 489C IPC.
Whereas in the present case the accused was found in possession of 42 counterfeit currency notes of Rs.500/- denomination, the only reasonable presumption that could be drawn is that the accused was found in possession of those notes with the intention of using them as genuine. At the time of recovery of currency notes, the accused was at Chandni Chowk Market, near Shish Ganj Gurudwara where the aforesaid transaction of counterfeit notes were done. There was no explanation as to why the Contd..........
/12/ accused was possessing the aforesaid recovered fake currency notes. The counterfeit currency notes recovered from the possession of the accused and same was used for conversion or sell of articles in the market as genuine. The PW1 Deepak Kumar , PW2 Santosh and PW3 Dharmender Kumar Gupta deposed in their deposition about the transaction and recovery of fake counterfiet currency notes. The testimony of all the prosecution witnesses are corroborative, believable and trustworthy as well as inspired confidence.
With the above said discussion and ratio of the law, facts and circumstances to which the accused has been charged, I am of the view that as per the evidence led by the prosecution and testimony of prosecution witnesses, the ingredients of section 489B and 489C IPC has been proved by the prosecution. The oral and documentary evidence inspire confidence and the testimony of prosecution witnesses are consistent and unimpeachable, therefore the accused Dharamjeet Verma S/o Sant Ram is hereby convicted for the offence punishable u/s 489B and 489C IPC. ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON 03.08.2009 (SATINDER KUMAR GAUTAM) ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE(WEST-04) DELHI IN THE COURT OF SH. SATINDER KUMAR GAUTAM, ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE( WEST-04) , DELHI.
SC NO. 155/1/09 State Versus Dharamjeet Verma S/o Sant Ram Verma, R/o Village Sarayanamu, P.S. Ronahi, Distt. Faizabad, U.P. Case arising out of FIR No. 81/2008 U/S: 489B/489C IPC P.S. Kotwali ORDER ON SENTENCE:
Present: Sh. Zafar Khan, Additional Public Prosecutor for State.
Accused/Convicted Dharamjeet with counsel Sh. Sanjay Kaushik. The accused/convicted has been convicted for offence punishable u/s 489B and 489C IPC vide separate detailed judgment dated 03.08.2009.
I have heard submission of Ld. APP for State and counsel for accused on the point of sentence and carefully gone through the material on record.
Ld. APP for State has argued that the prosecution has proved its case beyond all reasonable doubt and hence the accused is liable to sentence for the maximum punishment as prescribed under law.
Contd..........
/2/ On the other hand ld. Defence Counsel for the accused has submitted that the accused is victim of circumstances and the alleged fake currency notes have been planted upon him. He is clean antecedents and having family to support consisting wife and minor children and old ailing parents. The convicted has come to Delhi for some agricultural work and happened to be at Chandni Chowk there was some altercation with some police officials as such the present case has been planted upon him. He has nothing to do with the alleged offence. Ld. Counsel has further submitted that accused/convicted also remained in J/c for about 6 months and request to release the accused on undergone imprisonment.
In view of the aforesaid submission of Ld. APP for state and Ld. defence counsel, I am of the view that it has been very aptly indicated in Dennis Councle MCG Dautha Vs State of California (402 US 183: 28 L.D. 2d 711) that no formula of foolproof nature is possible that would provide a reasonable criterion in determining a just and appropriate punishment in the infinite variety of circumstances that may affect the gravity of the crime. In the absence of any foolproof formula which may provide any basis for reasonable criteria to correctly assess various circumstances germane to the consideration of gravity of crime, the Contd..........
/3/ discretionary judgment in the facts of each case, is the only way in which such judgment may be equitably distinguished.
In 2008 X AD (S.C.) 645 in case titled as Siriya @ Shri Lal Vs State of Madhya Pradesh, it has been held that, "in operation of Sentencing System, law should adopt corrective machinery or the deterrence based on factual matrix facts and given circumstances in each case, the nature of the crime, in manner in which it was planned and committed, the motive for commission of the crime, the conduct of the accused, nature of weapons used and all other attending circumstances are relevant in award of sentence. Sympathy to impose inadequate sentence would do more harm to the justice system to undermine the public confidence in the efficacy in law. .......... In each case, there should be proper balancing of aggravating and mitigating circumstances on the basis of relevant circumstances in a dispassionate manner.
The contagion of lawlessness would undermine social order and lay it in ruins. Protection of society and stamping out criminal proclivity must be the object of law which must be achieved by imposing appropriate sentence. Therefore, law as a cornerstone of the edifice of "order" should meet the challenges confronting the society. Friedman in his "Law in Changing Society" stated that, "State of criminal law continues to be as it Contd..........
/4/ should be decisive reflection of social consciousness of society". Therefore, in operating the sentencing system, law should adopt the corrective machinery or the deterrence based on factual matrix.
In Sevaka Perumal etc. Vs State of Tamil Nadu (1991 (3) SCC 471 "It is therefore, the duty of every court to award proper sentence having regard to the nature of the offence and the manner in which it was executed or committed etc. Therefore, in view of the facts and circumstances and the contentions raised by the Ld. APP for state and the counsel for accused, convicted Dharamjeet Verma S/o Sant Ram is sentenced to already undergone imprisonment with fine of Rs.20,000/- in default of 6 months SI for the offence punishable u/s 489b and 489C IPC. I think the sentence awarded will meet the end of justice and also have a deterrent as well as reformatory way in the mind of the convicted.
Copy of this order be given to the convicted free of cost forthwith.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON 4.8.2009 (SATINDER KUMAR GAUTAM) ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE(WEST-04) DELHI