Delhi District Court
State vs . Naresh Jain & Others on 19 May, 2014
IN THE COURT OF SHRI ATUL KUMAR GARG: ADDL.
SESSIONS JUDGE-03 (CENTRAL), DELHI
SC No.43/11
State ... Complainant
Versus
1. Naresh Jain
S/o late Sh. Dev Raj Jain
R/o GD-6, Pitam Pura,
Delhi.
2. Harjesh Narain @ Narain Verma
R/o C-108, Inder Puri,
Delhi
3. Sudhir Kumar
S/o Tilak Raj
R/o C-108, Inderpuri
Delhi-110092. ... Accused Persons
FIR No.5/2005
PS : Special Cell
U/S 489-B/489-C IPC
Date of institution: 07.04.2005
Date of arguments: 12.05.2014
Date of judgment : 19.05.2014
JUDGMENT
1. Currency is the back-bone of any economy and helps people in their day to day transaction, whether commercial or household and its use is indispensable. General acceptability and SC No.43/11 Page No.1 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others faith of public in it are basic pre-requisite of its existence. Presence of forged or counterfeit currency in any economy can shackle smooth functioning of the economy. In extreme case it can also result in loss of people's faith in the currency and thus in the economic system. Penetration of counterfeit currency notes can affect basic frame of economic activities and lead the economy to doldrums.
2. In order to make better provisions for the protection of cur-
rency and bank notes against forgery, sections 489A to 489D of the Penal Code were coined by the Currency Notes Forgery Act, 1899. Prior to that offences relating to paper currency were dealt with under general provisions, such as sections 467, 471 and 472 of the Penal Code. At times it was difficult to secure a conviction under other sections. These provisions are, therefore, intended to fill in the gap which those sections left in the general law, in their applicability to paper currency. Section 489-A of the Penal Code, coins an offence of counterfeiting currency notes or bank notes. Section 489-C of the Penal Code carries criminality as regards SC No.43/11 Page No.2 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others forged currency notes a step further by punishing their posses- sion, when it is accompanied by an intention to use them as gen- uine, while provisions of section 489-B are intended to stop cir- culation of forged notes by punishing those who deal in them, knowing or having reason to believe them to be forged. Next, the transaction reprobated are sale, purchase, receipt and trafficking such notes. Provisions of section 489-D of the Penal Code are widely worded and clearly covers a case where a person is found in possession of machinery, instruments or material for the pur- pose of being used for counterfeiting currency notes, even though the machinery, instruments or material so found were not all the articles required for the purpose of counterfeiting. Section 489-D of the Penal Code does not penalized the making and selling of a machinery, instruments or material, which may be used for forgery or counterfeiting, but only penalises it when the accused make or sells it knowing or having reason it believe that it is in- tended to be so used.
SC No.43/11 Page No.3 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others
3. Could the prosecution establish above ingredients in the present controversy? For an answer, facts gain importance. The facts disclosed in the charge sheet under Section 173 Cr.P.C. in detail are that the staff of PS Special Cell, Delhi Police received an information from Central Intelligence Agency about the fake Indian currency notes. The specific information was about one Naresh Jain having his shop in Sadar Bazar, Delhi who is dealing in fake currency notes and he would be coming outside Mehra Sons, NDSE-I, New Delhi at about 5.00 p.m. to give a delivery of fake currency notes in a Honda City Car bearing registration no.DL2CM-8478. The said information was reduced into writing and discussed with senior officers. A team was constituted for taking necessary action. The said team comprising of SI Arvind Kumar, SI Chandrika Prasad, HC Raj Kumar, HC Yudhvir Singh, Ct. Mohan, Ct. Devi Dayal, Ct. Sanjay and Ct. Dev Dutt led by Insp. Govind Sharma left the office of special cell in two private cars and one two wheeler at 4.00 p.m. and reached at the red light under the flyover of NDSE on Ring Road at 4.20 p.m. Five or SC No.43/11 Page No.4 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others seven passerby were requested to join the raiding party after disclosing the information but none joined the raiding party. Insp. Govind Sharma briefed the team and the team took their re- spective positions at about 4.45 p.m. outside of Mehra Sons, NDSE-I, New Delhi. At about 5.10 p.m. the above car came from the side of Andrew Ganj and the driver parked the same op- posite the Mehra Sons, NDSE-I after entering into the the service lane from Ring Road. The person driving the car then started waiting for some one after coming out of the car and stood at the right side of the car. After about 20 minutes when nobody came, he opened his car and was about to sit and back his car, he was apprehended with the help of accompanied staff. His identity was revealed as Naresh Jain S/o late Sh. Dev Raj Jain. On cursory search, one wad of currency notes of Rs.1000/- denomination was recovered from his left side pant pocket. The recovered cur- rency notes were checked and were found to be counterfeited ones. The series of fake currency notes were found to be 6CC-976201 to 976300 (total ninety seven notes and notes hav- SC No.43/11 Page No.5 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others ing serial no.06,08 & 72 were found missing from the wad) alongwith three notes of the serial no. 6CC-980801 to 980803. On checking the dash board of his Honda City Car, three more wads of currency notes of Rs.1000/- were recovered. The currency notes were seized. Thereafter, rukka was prepared by SI Arvind Kumar and a case was registered. During the course of investigation, accused person Naresh Jain had made disclousre statement that he has taken all those currency notes from Harjesh Narain and Lucky in Calcutta. After completion of investigation, police filed the charge sheet in the court against the accused Naresh Jain. Thereafter, accused Harjesh Narain and Sudhir Kumar @ Lucky were also apprehended in the present case. They were called through production warrants from Calcutta Jail. Subsequently supplementary charge sheet was filed mentioning the names of five more witnesses, namely, SI V.N. Jha, HC Kuldeep Singh, SI B.C. Majumdar, HC Rakesh Tomar, SI Umesh Barthwal.
SC No.43/11 Page No.6 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others
4. After being heard, vide order dated 27.1.2006, accused Naresh Jain was charged for the offence punishable under Section 489-B and 489-C read with Section 120-B IPC. Accused Harjesh Narain and Sudhir Kumar were charged for the offence punishable under Section 120-B IPC. Accused persons did not plead guilty and claimed trial.
5. In order to substantiate the charge, the prosecution has relied upon as many as fourteen witnesses, namely, Satpal Gupta, Raj Kumar, Manoj Goel, Chaman Lal, Ankit Dhir, Ravi Sharma, ASI Krishan Pal, ASI Paramjit, SI Arvind Kumar, SI Chandrika Prasad, HC Raj Kumar, HC Rakesh Tomer, Sh. M.P. Dhande, and SI Umesh Barthwal. Subsequently supplementary charge sheet was also filed mentioning the names of five more witnesses namely, SI V.N. Jha, HC Kuldeep Singh, SI B.C. Majumdar, HC Rakesh Tomar, SI Umesh Barthwal. In fact, the prosecution had examined seventeen witnesses in all.
6. The prosecution evidence consists of two set of evidence.
First set of evidence consists of oral testimonies of Chaman Lal, SC No.43/11 Page No.7 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others Satpal Gupta, Ravi Sharma, Raj Kumar, Manoj Goel and Ankit Dhir examined as PW1, PW2, PW3, PW4, PW5 and PW17 by the prosecution. The second set of evidence consists of evidence of police officials who had chained the investigation. They are ASI Kishan Pal, ASI Paramjeet, SI B.C. Majumdar and Umesh Barthwal examined as PW6, PW7, PW12 and PW16. The remaining witnesses are police officials who were members of the raiding party.
7. PW 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 17 are the witnesses to the fact that acused Naresh Jain had given them fake currency notes to them in their business transactions. They had come to their own in the office of special cell Delhi Police after coming to know the arrest of accused Naresh jain in this case. While remaining witnesses are the witnesses of recovery or scientific officers who had examined the currency notes or the formal witnesses.
8. PW6 ASI Kishan Pal was the duty officer in police station PS Special Cell Lodhi Colony. He has scribed the FIR at about 7.30 p.m. on 3.1.2005 on the basis of rukka sent by SI Arvind SC No.43/11 Page No.8 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others Kumar. He has proved the copy of the same as Ex.PW6/A. PW7 was Incharge Malkhana PS Special Cell Lodhi Colony. He deposed that on 3.1.2005 while being incharge Malkhana of PS Special Cell, he was given four sealed wad (bundles) of currency notes sealed with the help of thread from one side and seal of AK was affixed on them. One Honda City Car bearing No.DL2CM 8478 and the personal search articles of accused Naresh Jain were deposited by Inspector Umesh Barthwal, which he had entered at serial no.543 in Register No.19. He further deposed that on 6/7/8-01.2005, while posting as Incharge of Malkhana, he was given one wad of Rs.100 denomination and twenty four currency notes of Rs.100 denomination plus five currency notes of Rs.1000/- denomination on respective dates by Inspector Umesh Barthwal, which he had entered at serial no.548, 549, 550 respectively. He further deposed that on 8.2.2005 property recovered and entered at serial no.548, 549 and 550 were sent through HC Rakesh Kumar to Govt. Press Nasik. PW9 HC Rakesh Tomar had deposited the eight sealed parcels of Indian SC No.43/11 Page No.9 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others fake currency notes in the Govt. Press Nasik on 10.2.2005. Thereafter, after obtaining opinion from the Govt. Press Nasik, they had returned to Delhi on 18.2.2005.
9. PW12 B.C. Majumdar had deposed that on 1.1.2005 IO SI Mukesh Singh had handed over the case file of FIR No. 5/05 under Section 120-B/489A/489-C IPC PS New Market, Calcutta for further investigation. Alongwith file, four accused persons, Harjesh Narain, Mohd. Sarfaraz, Sudhir Kumar @ Lucky @ Deepak and Sanjeev Vermay were also handed over to him. He interrogated those accused persons. Accused Harjesh Narain and accused Sudhir Kumar disclosed that they had delivered fake currency notes to one Naresh Jain. PW15 M.P. Dhande has examined and checked the counterfeit currency notes being Deputy Manager, Currency Note Press, Nasik Road, Maharashtra, which was sent to him by the Special Cell Delhi Police. All the above said currency notes were found fake and counterfeit currency notes. He has proved his detailed report as SC No.43/11 Page No.10 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others Ex.PW15/A bearing his signatures at points A, B & C respectively.
10. PW13 and PW14 had witnessed the arrest of the accused Harjesh Narain and Sudhir Kumar. PW13 deposed that on 9.3.2005, Inspector Lalit Mohan has handed over the case file to him because SI Umesh Barthwal was busy in some other official work. Accused Harjesh Narain and Sudhir Kumar were produced in the court on production warrants. He interrogated the accused persons and formally arrested them with the permission of the court. PW14 had witnessed the arrest of the accused Harjesh Narain and Sudhir Kumar.
11. PW8, PW10 and PW11 are the members of raiding party.
They all deposed that on 3.1.2005 while receiving an information from the Central Intelligence Agency about the circulation of fake currency notes and involvement of Naresh Jain, who owned a shop at Sadar Bazar and about his visit in front of Mehra Sons, NDSE part I for delivering the fake currency notes. Being police personal of Special Cell Delhi Police, they formed a raiding party SC No.43/11 Page No.11 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others under the leadership of inspector Govind Sharma. They all deposed that raiding party consisted of SI Chandrika Prasad, SI Arvind, HC Raj Kumar, HC Yudhbir, Ct. Mohan, Ct. Devi Dayal, Ct. Dev Dutt and Constable Sanjay. They left the office at about 4.00 p.m. in two private vehicles and one motorcycle and reached near the spot at about 4.20 p.m. There, four/five passerby were asked to join the raiding party but they refused to join. They took over the position near the spot as directed by the IO. At about 5.10 p.m. the said Honda City car came from the side of Andrew Ganj and stopped in front of Mehra Sons Jewellers, driver of the vehicle came out and kept on standing near the car and waited for about 20 minutes. Thereafter, he again started boarding the car. They rushed and over powered him. SI Arvind searched him and one bundle of currency notes of Rs.1000/- denomination was recovered from the left pocket of his trouser. Apparently, it was found to be fake and upon being counted the bundle was found of 97 currency notes. Series of those currency notes was noted down. Three more notes of other series were also in the bundle SC No.43/11 Page No.12 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others but all 100 notes were fake. Dashboard of the vehicle was also checked which was found three more bundles of the same currency notes. They all deposed that investigating officer pre- pared the detailed rukka Ex.PW8/A. FIR was got registered. SI Umesh Barthwal took over the investigation. Site plan was prepared at the instance of SI Arvind, SI Arvind and SI Umesh Barthwal had interrogated the accused. He has also inspected the arrest. Witness had also identified the fake currency notes.
12. PW16 was the investigating officer. According to the prosecution, he had come at the spot after registration of the case. He reached outside Mehra Sons where at about 7.15 p.m. SI Arvind had handed over the carbon copy of the rukka, seizure memo of four wad of fake Indian currency notes mark R1 to R4. SI Arvind apprised him about the facts of recovery. He had also handed over the accused Naresh Jain and his car to him. He prepared the site plan Ex.PW16/B. He interrogated Naresh Jain and after interrogation prepared his arrest memo Ex.PW8/C and personal search memo Ex.PW8/D. He also seized the car of SC No.43/11 Page No.13 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others accused Naresh Jain vide seizure memo Ex.PW8/G. He deposed that accused Naresh Jain was produced in the court and his PC remand was received. On 6.1.2005, accused was again interrogated and his supplementary disclosure statement Ex.PW8/F was recorded. Pursuant to the disclosure statement on 6.1.2005 Satpal Gupta came to the office of Special Cell and he handed over him one wad of 100 Indian currency notes in the denomination of Rs.1000/- each and stated that these notes were given by his tenant Naresh Jain as security amount. 100 notes of fake Indian currency notes were converted into a parcel with the help of a thread and marked SG and sealed with the seal of UB. The details of the currency notes were recorded in the seizure memo which is Ex.PW4/B. The rent agreement was also taken into possession through seizure memo Ex.PW2/C. On 7.1.2005, Sh. Raj Kumar came to the office of Special Cell and handed over him 24 notes in the denomination of Rs.1000/- each and stated that these notes were given to him by accused Naresh Jain. He had also seized the same as Ex.PW1/A. 25 currency notes SC No.43/11 Page No.14 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others were given mark RK1 and sealed with the seal of UB. On 8.1.2005, Raj Kumar again came to the office of Special Cell and handed over to him 25 notes in the denomination of Rs.1000/- each and stated that these are other notes given to him by accused Naresh Jain. The details of the currency notes were recorded in the seizure memo Ex.PW1/B. 25 currency notes were given mark RK2 and sealed with the seal of UB. On the same day, Ankit Dhir came to the office of special cell and handed over him five notes in the denomination of Rs.1000/- each and stated that these notes were given to him by the accused Naresh Jain. He recorded the details of the currency notes in the seizure memo Ex.PW8/H. He deposed that these currency notes were sent to currency notes Press Nasik through HC Rakesh Tomar for expert opinion. Statement of incharge Malkhana ASI Paramjeet was recorded on 18.2.2005. HC Rakesh Tomar returned to the police station after depositing the case property and his statement was also recorded. Result from the currency notes was also collected from the Nasik Press. He deposed that on 9.3.2005 accused Harjesh Narain and SC No.43/11 Page No.15 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others Sudhir Kumar were also produced before the concerned court on being called through production warrants. SI V.N. Jha arrested both the accused persons in this case and handed over the tile to him. He had also identified the currency notes.
13. In order to afford an opportunity to explain the circumstances appearing in evidence, all the accused persons were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Accused Claimed innocence and false implication. Accused Naresh Jain had stated that he has not committed any offence. On 03.01.2005, he was called by SI Umesh Barthwal at his office at Lodhi Colony Special Cell to join the investigation in some case. He was made to sit in the police station on the same night without any cause. When he asked the reason for his detention, he was misbehaved and was not allowed to take to his relatives. When he told that he will report the matter to the senior officers for his illegal detention, Mr.Barthwal became very aggressive and ultimately implicated him in this false case. Nothing was recovered from him. He had also examined one witness in defence, namely, SC No.43/11 Page No.16 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others Dalbir as DW1 who deposed that he was driver to Naresh Jain since the year 2005. On 2.5.2005, he was asked to go to the Special Cell by Sh. Naresh Jain. He took the vehicle to the office of Special Cell at Lodhi Colony. He reached at about 11.00 or 11.15 a.m.. Keys of the car was taken by the police officials. He was asked to go from there and was not allowed to take Naresh Jain upto 9.30 p.m.
14. On behalf of the state, Sh. Rajiv Mohan, ld. Special PP had argued stating that from the testimony of PW1, PW2 and PW5 the prosecution has established his case against the accused Naresh Jain for the offence punishable under Section 489-B that fake currency notes were circulated by the accused Naresh Jain in the market and PW1, PW2, PW3, PW4, PW5 and PW17 had produced counterfeit currency notes given by the accused Naresh Jain to them. He further submitted that PW8, PW10 and PW11 deposed about the apprehension of accused Naresh Jain who was apprehended alongwith fake currency notes in a Honda City Car on 3.1.2005 at about 5.10 p.m. from NDSE Part-I. He submitted SC No.43/11 Page No.17 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others that prosecution has proved its case against accused Naresh Jain and other two accused persons, who had disclosed before the Calcutta Police that they had delivered the fake currency notes to the accused Naresh Jain.
15. On the other hand, ld. Counsel for the accused persons Sh.Subhash Bhuttan had rebutted the arguments stating that prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused per- sons. He had drawn the attention of the court towards the order passed by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pradeep Nandrajog while granting bail to the accused Naresh Jain. He further submits that there are so many infirmity in the entire investigation which pin point the fact that actually the fake currency notes were planted upon the accused Naresh Jain. He submitted that as per the prosecution case, a secret information has been received from the Central Intelligence Agency which corresponds to the Central Intelli- gence Agency of America and this fact was also mentioned in the order passed by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pradeep Nandrajog, which fact has not been disputed during the entire course of trial till the SC No.43/11 Page No.18 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others filing of the written arguments. Even PW16 when asked by the defence counsel has stated that he cannot tell the name of the officers of Central Intelligence Agency. He has submitted that Central Intelligence Agency of America by no stretch of imagina- tion can give such trivial information to the local police station of Delhi. He further argued that all the police officials as well as entire proceedings, it was stated that secret information was in relation to the accused Naresh Jain who would visit outside Mehra Sons Jewellers at NDSE Part-I while the spot depicting in the site plan Ex.PW16/B shows that it was NDSE Part-II and this fact even has been admitted by PW16 that site plan correspond to NDSE Part-II in the written arguments signed by him. He further submitted that virtually there is no evidence on judicial record connecting accused Harjesh Narain as well as Sudhir Kumar for the offence punishable under Section 120-B IPC. He submitted that accused persons deserves to be acquitted because of their false implication.
SC No.43/11 Page No.19 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others
16. I have heard the arguments, perused the record and analyze the evidence. Here accused Naresh Jain has been charged for the offence punishable under Section 120-B/489-B/489-C IPC while the accused Harjesh Narain and Sudhir Kumar were charged for the offence punishable under Section 120-B IPC. Four accused persons namely, Harjesh Narain, Mohd. Sarfaraz, Sudhir @ Deepak and Sanjeev Verma were arrested on 1.1.2005 in a case FIR No.5/05 PS New Market, Calcutta wherein fake currency notes were recovered, there accused Harjesh Narain and Deepak had disclosed that they had delivered the consignment of fake currency notes to the accused Naresh Jain. On 3.1.2005, Special Cell, Delhi Police had received specific tip at about 3.00 p.m. from the Central Intelligence Agency about the circulation of the fake currency notes as well as involvement of accused Naresh Jain who would have to visit at NDSE Part-I near Mehra Sons in his Honda City Car bearing No. No.DL2CM8478 at about 5.00 p.m. Raiding party was formed and reached at Mehra Sons NDSE Part I. At about 5.10 p.m. one Honda City Car bearing SC No.43/11 Page No.20 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others No.DL2CM8478 came from the side of Andrew Ganj to Ring Road and driver parked the car and got down and after waiting when nobody turned up, he was to sit in the car back. He was apprehended and from his pocket one wad of counterfeit currency note of Rs.1000/- denomination found to be counterfeit currency note was recovered. Their further case is that three more wads of counterfeit currency note of Rs.1000/- denomination were recovered from the dashboard of the car. Their further case is that the accused was taken on police remand. Several persons had come in the office of Special Cell stating that they were given counterfeit currency notes by the accused Naresh Jain. Subsequently accused Harjesh Narain and Sudhir Kumar were also arrested in this case and they were also charged for the offence punishable under Section 120-B of IPC as conspiracy has been hatched for circulating the counterfeit currency notes.
17. Expert witness PW15 who had come from Nasik Press, had deposed that when checked carefully by him the parcel contain- ing notes of Rs.1000/- denomination sent by the Delhi Police, he SC No.43/11 Page No.21 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others found the same as counterfeit currency notes. He proved his detailed report as Ex.PW15/A.
18. Now, the prosecution has to prove that the above said counterfeit notes were found from the accused Naresh Jain at the said date, time and place. A very serious question has been arisen herein at the time of hearing the bail application of Naresh Jain whether Central Intelligence Agency which corresponds to Central Intelligence Agency of America had given the said trivial and specific information in regard to the transportation of small quantity of fake currency notes and to be delivered at the specific point. This contention has not been changed till the written arguments are filed. In the written arguments submitted by Shri Rajiv Mohan, ld. Special PP, it is stated that Central Intelligence Agency does not correspond to Central Intelligence Agency of America rather than correspond to Intelligence Bureau or RAW. This arguments submitted to this court by the ld. Special PP for the State is just opposite to the whole judicial record where the word 'Central Intelligence Agency' has been mentioned. Informa- SC No.43/11 Page No.22 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others tion has been reduced in writing and statement of each and every witness has been recorded to this effect that special cell had received specific input from the Central Intelligence Agency. Even all the witnesses, namely, PW8, PW10 & PW11 had deposed categorically the fact about receiving the input from the Central Intelligence Agency. Even PW10 Insp. Arvind Kumar has been asked about the name of Central Intelligence Agency officials, which the witnesses denied to have disclosed. There- fore, the written arguments submitted by the prosecution is just opposite to the stand taken on judicial record.
19. Further the prosecution case is that accused Naresh Jain has been apprehended while coming on his Honda City Car bear- ing No.DL2CM8478 from Andrew Ganj side on 3.1.2005 and stopped the vehicle outside Mehra Sons NDSE Part-I in pur- suance to the specific tip received from Central Intelligence Agency about supply of fake currency notes outside Mehra Sons NDSE Part-I. Prosecution further relied upon the document i.e. the site plan Ex.PW16/B prepared at the site showing the place of SC No.43/11 Page No.23 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others apprehension and arrest of the accused Naresh Jain at NDSE Part-I. This court has taken the judicial notice of the fact that actually if one moves from the Andrew Ganj side towards the AIIMS, then it is not NDSE Part-I rather than it is NDSE Part-II. All the witnesses of the prosecution i.e. PW8, PW10 and PW11 had deposed the fact that actually it is NDSE Part-I where the ac- cused was apprehended while coming from the side of Andrew Ganj. None of the witnesses had stated that it is NDSE Part-II. Ld. Counsel for the accused had drawn attention towards the cross examination of prosecution witnesses i.e. PW11 and PW16 who had deposed differently in regard to the location. PW1 de- posed about the various facts regarding the spot which corre- spond to NDSE Part-I while PW16 deposed contrary.
20. During the course of arguments, Sh.Rajiv Mohan, ld.
Special PP tried to down play this fact by stating that IO was con- fused in the NDSE Part-I or Part-II, as such, he had prepared the site plan mentioning the word NDSE Part-I in Latin word while the site plan actually belongs to NDSE Part-II where the accused SC No.43/11 Page No.24 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others was actually apprehended and arrested. This court failed to com- prehend the above said position/somersault taken by the ld. Spe- cial PP. during the course of filing of written arguments. The al- leged specific input was about NDSE Part-I, then no question arises as to how the whole police team had reached to NDSE Part-II while accused has to come at NDSE Part-I for delivering the counterfeit currency notes outside the Mehra Sons. DD No.15 dated 30.1.2005 has not been proved by the prosecution nor it has been placed on judicial record. However, in order to make clarity, this court had summoned the daily rojnamcha register containing the information received to Inspector Arvind Kumar and reduced in writing in the Rojnamcha of the PS Special Cell. Photo copy of the DD entry No. 15 has been placed on record after photo copying from the original register and exhibited as mark A. Lan- guage of the DD Entry No.15 dated 3.1.2005 is reproduced here- in for the sake of convenience.
"At 3.30 p.m. it is lodge that today information was received from Central Intelligence Agency that a Syndicate of fake Indian Currency is active in different parts of India. And that one Naresh Jain SC No.43/11 Page No.25 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others having shop in Sadar Bazar Delhi is also dealing in fake currency, he would be coming outside Mehra Sons NDSE-I, New Delhi at about 5.00 p.m. to give a delivery of fake currency with some one in a Honda City Car No.DL2CM8478. This information is lodged and is being discussed with the senior officers by self."
21. If we go through carefully the above said information re-
duced in writing at serial no.15 in the daily rojnamcha of Police Station Special Cell dated 3.1.2005, then it revealed the clear pic- ture. This information has been received from Central Intelli- gence Agency which fact has been unrebutted till the filing of the written arguments. Further, the information is in regard to Naresh Jain who would be coming outside Mehra Sons, NDSE Part-I, New Delhi at about 5.00 p.m. for delivering of fake currency notes in his Honda City Car bearing No.DL2CM8478. The infor- mation is in regard to the NDSE Part-I and the statement of every witness has been recorded to this effect that accused Naresh Jain would have been coming in his Honda City Car at NDSE Part-I outside Mehra Sons Jewellers. This court had taken notice of the fact that Mehra Sons Jewellers are both in NDSE Part-I as well as SC No.43/11 Page No.26 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others NDSE Part-II. Site plan Ex.PW16/B admittedly corresponds to the NDSE Part-II, which fact has been admitted by Sh.Rajiv Mohan, ld. Special PP who had signed the written arguments. Written arguments has also been signed by Inspector Umesh Barthwal, Investigating officer of the present case. If this is the position/ somersault taken by the ld. Prosecutor regarding the site plan Ex.PW16/B, then the question arises, then how the police force had reached to NDSE, Part-II for apprehending the accused while specific input was in regard to coming of accused Naresh Jain at NDSE Part-I outside Mehra Sons Jewellers. If the police team had not ascertained the specific tip/ information which they had possessed, then the story put forth by the prosecution cannot be believed. In case like this where the accused has been charged for possessing the contrabands/ prohibited articles, the place of arrest assumes importance. It is the heart of the case and the pros- ecution is bound to prove this material fact for charging anybody that the accused was found in possession of contrabands/ prohib- ited articles at particular date, time and place. Otherwise, the SC No.43/11 Page No.27 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others place of arrest is not so significant like the case of assault, rape, murder etc. where the incident has been happened somewhere else. Here the prosecution has failed to prove this vital fact.
22. Moreover, information received to SI Arvind Kumar was in respect of the fact that accused Naresh Jain would be coming out- side the Mehra Sons Jewellers, NDSE Part-I and was not in re- spect of the fact that the accused Naresh Jain would have come from Andrew Ganj side. One cannot obvious of the fact that if a person had come from the Andrew Ganj side, then the person standing at NDSE Part-I cannot see him because of over bridge between the divider separating the NDSE Part-I and NDSE Part- II. If the Honda City Car had taken U-turn and had come to NDSE Part-I as deposed by the witnesses, then witnesses would have deposed the fact that the accused had come from AIIMS side and not from the Andrew Ganj side which are of opposite direction. Therefore, if we accept the version of the prosecution as mentioned in the written arguments then it appears that all the witnesses had deposed falsely that the accused had come at SC No.43/11 Page No.28 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others NDSE Part-I and there they have apprehended. PW11 deposed so many facts about the location of NDSE Part-I. If the witnesses deposed correctly, then the site plan prepared is forged document and IO Inspector Umesh Barthwal did not go to the spot and met the police team there alongwith accused. It appears that nothing like this has happened. Accused has been implicated in this case because of the fact that earlier Calcutta Police had arrested Harjesh Narain and Sudhir Kumar in a criminal case having FIR No. 5/05 under Section 120-B/489A/489-C IPC PS New Market, Calcutta besides the two other accused and there Harjesh Narain and Sudhir Kumar, the co-accused herein had made disclosure statement before the Calcutta Police about delivering of fake cur- rency notes to Naresh Jain, a resident of Delhi having a shop at Sadar Bazar and the Delhi police had arrested him and made him the accused in this case and shown the recovery. Otherwise, the whole of the police story regarding the arrest of the accused Naresh Jain has been failed.
SC No.43/11 Page No.29 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others
23. From the above discussions, it appears that all the police officials i.e. PW8, PW10 and PW11 deposed contrary to the writ- ten submissions/ stand taken by the Special Public Prosecutor Sh. Rajiv Mehra that the site plan was correctly prepared and corre- spond to the site which actually is not correct according to the specific input which correspond to NDSE Part-I. According to the Inspector Umesh Barthwal PW16 he met the Inspector Arvind Kumar and his team at NDSE Part-II according to the site plan while that is not the situation as depicted in the judicial record. It appears that whole of the police force had concocted the above said story regarding the apprehension of the accused with the currency notes in his Honda City Car. In that circum- stances, the defence is much probable that accused Naresh Jain has been called from his house and was implicated in this case because his name has been surfaced in the disclosure statement made by the co-accused Harjesh Narain and Sudhir Kumar in the case FIR No.5/05 under Section 120-B/489A/489-C IPC PS New Market, Calcutta. Therefore, the prosecution has failed to prove SC No.43/11 Page No.30 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others its case against the accused Naresh Jain u/s 489-C IPC.
24. Further, the prosecution has charged the accused Naresh Jain for the offence punishable under Section 120-B/34 IPC as well as 489-B as fake currency notes have been circulated by him as deposed by the PW1, PW2, PW3, PW5, PW6 and PW17. The testimony of the above said witnesses are not above board. Ac- cording to the police, these persons had come themselves in the police station, Special Cell and produced the fake currency notes stating that these currency notes have been given by the accused Naresh Jain. Instead of making them as accused, the police had let off these accused persons and created the evidence against the accused Naresh Jain. One of the witness had produced Rs.One lac stating that Naresh Jain had given the said notes to him as ad- vance of the tenanted premises. Admittedly in the rent agreement Ex.PW2/A, PW2 Satya Pal had received the payment of Rs. 1,30,000/- as security of the tenanted property bearing No.GD6, situated at Pitam Pura, Delhi on 21.12.2004 while the tenancy become effective from 25.12.2004. Disclosure statement made SC No.43/11 Page No.31 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others by the co-accused persons before the Delhi Police is that the counterfeit currency notes had been delivered to Naresh Jain on 29.12.2004. Meaning thereby that the witness PW2 had deposed falsely and the prosecution or the police had created the evidence against the accused Naresh Jain that he had delivered the amount to PW2 Satpal from the delivery of counterfeit currency notes by the co-accused persons. When the accused Naresh Jain has not been apprehended from the spot, then whole of the story regard- ing the other fact cannot be relied that PW1, PW2, PW3, PW5 and PW17 were given the fake/ counterfeit currency notes by ac- cused Naresh Jain.
25. In view of the above discussions, I am of the view that prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused Naresh Jain for the offence of possessing of fake/ counterfeit cur- rency notes of Rs. Four lacs in the denomination of Rs.1000/-. Further the evidence of PW1, PW2, PW3, PW5, PW6 and PW17 also does not inspire confidence because admittedly these peo- ples had come forward in the police station after arrest of the ac- SC No.43/11 Page No.32 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others cused Naresh Jain that he had given these notes to him and they have kept them because when the arrest is itself under cloud. There is no evidence at all against the accused Harjesh Narain as well as accused Sudhir Kumar for hatching the conspiracy along- with Naresh Jain in circulating the fake/ counterfeit currency notes. Therefore, accused Naresh Jain has been acquitted from the charge under Section 489-B/489-C/120-B IPC. Accused Har- jesh Narain and Sudhir Kumar have been acquitted from the charge under Section 120-B of IPC. Their bail bond and surety bond stand cancelled and discharged. A copy of this order is sent to Commissioner of Police with a direction to take action against the police team for creating false evidence against the accused Naresh Jain and report to this court about the action taken within one month of receipt of this order. File is consigned to record room.
Announced in open court (ATUL KUMAR GARG) on 19th May 2014 Addl. Sessions Judge-03 (Central), Delhi SC No.43/11 Page No.33 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others FIR No.5/2005 PS : Special Cell State Vs. Naresh Jain etc. 19.05.2014 Present : Sh. Rajiv Mohan ld. Special PP for the State. All the accused persons are on bail.
DD register is perused. Copy of the DD no.15 has been taken from the register and marked A by this court.
Vide separate judgment announced in open court, accused Naresh Jain is acquitted from the charge under Section 489-B/489- C/120-B IPC. Accused Harjesh Narain and Sudhir Kumar are acquitted from the charge under Section 120-B of IPC. Their bail bond and surety bond stand cancelled and discharged. A copy of this order is Sent to Commissioner of Police for taking action against the erring police officials and report to this court within one month. File is consigned to record room. Ahlmad is directed to open the Misc. file in this regard.
(Atul Kumar Garg) ASJ-3 (Central)/19.05.2014 SC No.43/11 Page No.34 State Vs. Naresh Jain & others