Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

1. The appellants had been tried for various offences of counterfeiting currency notes under Sections 489-A, 489-B, 489-C, 489-D, 489-E and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. By this appeal, the appellants challenge their conviction and substantive sentence of rigorous imprisonment and fine imposed by the trial Court.

2. The prosecution case in brief is that on 14-11-1998 accused/appellant No. 1-Bharti had gone to Sakkardara Market for shopping and in the process of shopping at different places, she purchased certain articles and gave counterfeit currency notes of the denomination of Rs. 500 as also Rs. 50. It appears that appellant No. 1-Bharti was detained in the market by the public and it was being said that appellant No. 1 -Bharti was possessing fake currency notes. In the meantime, police had been informed and the police party headed by PSI Sapkale arrived there. In the presence of panchas, the search of the appellant No. 1-Bharti was conducted and on her search, counterfeit currency notes of Rs. 500 denomination and two counterfeit currency notes of Rs. 50 denomination were recovered. Appellant No. 1-Bharti then took the police to Raghute Bhavan, Dighori, Nagpur where she was staying along with the other co-accused. Appellant No. 2 is stated to be the second wife of appellant No. 3, first wife being the appellant No. 1. During his search, 21 onesided printed notes of Rs. 50 denomination, 8 one sided printed notes of Rs. 500 denomination and 4 notes of Rs. 100 denomination, blank papers for printing notes' one colour computerised xerox machine; printing kit etc. were recovered. Appellant No. 2 was present in the house during the said search. Appellant No. 3 had absconded and he was arrested only on 24-3-1999 in some other offence and was arrested in connection with the case under consideration on 27-3-1999. At his instance, 48 fake currency notes of Rs. 500 denomination were recovered from his house after opening the lock of a cupboard and from under an idol kept there for worship.

14. P.W. 3 Brahma likewise has stated that at about 7.30 p.m., accused No. 1 had purchased 1 kg of vegetable flower and gave him Rs. 50/-. He paid her back Rs. 40/-. Accused No. 1 left his shop and was later caught by the public on account of handing over fake currency notes. According to P.W. 3 Brahma, he verified the currency note given by accused No. 1 and found that there was no security wire in that note. He also admitted during his cross-examination that before the incident he had no occasion to see accused No. 1; there was no electric lamp in his shop and that he had not minutely observed the accused No. 1. However, accused No. 1 was immediately caught after she had visited the shop of P.W. 3 Brahma and at that time, she was in possession of fake currency notes. In the light of these facts, the evidence of P.W. 3 Brahma, cannot be totally discarded. The evidence of P.Ws. 1 and 3, though by itself may not be sufficient, but in the light of other evidence on record, it certainly corroborates the prosecution version that the accused No. 1 was in possession of counterfeit currency notes and she had passed the counterfeit currency notes to the shop-keepers.

1. Water mark was totally absent in the said currency notes.

2. The quality of the paper was inferior.

3. Security thread was absent.

4. Number pannels were not in alignment. There were more notes than one bearing the same number.

5. The quality of the printing was inferior.

In this respect, learned Advocate for appellants has stated that according to this witness, final authority to give opinion is the Security Press and as such, opinion given by him cannot be accepted. I do not find any merit in the said submission of the learned Advocate for appellants since P.W. 8 Venkat Rama was working as Treasurer in the Reserve Bank of India and Treasurer has expertise to detect the fake and counterfeit currency notes. He has given valid grounds on the basis of which he has come to the conclusion that the currency notes were counterfeit and in one of them security thread was absent. It is a matter of common knowledge that genuine currency notes have security thread and absence of the same by itself would show that the currency notes were counterfeit in nature.

19. Insofar as recovery of the counterfeit currency notes from the house is concerned, the same are said to have been printed only on one side and obviously without any expert opinion, it can be said that the same are counterfeit currency notes. Besides that, from the house 21 blank papers were recovered on which two blocks of denomination of Rs. 50/- and eight blank papers one side of which had printing with two blocks of denomination of Rs. 50/-.

20. The evidence on record thus establishes the charge of conspiracy under Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code for printing counterfeit notes which were found in possession of the accused/appellants. There is evidence that partly printed counterfeit notes were also found from the house of appellants. The house, admittedly, was taken on lease by accused No. 3 and the other two appellants are his wives. Obviously these currency notes were counterfeit and the accused were knowing and having reason to believe the same to be forged and counterfeit and intending to use the same as genuine or that it may be used as genuine. It is also established that the appellants were performing the process of counterfeiting the currency note and were found in possession of the instruments and materials for forging or counterfeiting currency notes. The appellant No. 3 who seems to be the brain behind counterfeiting currency notes, absconded and could be arrested only after about four months of the incident in question. In view of the above, I am of the opinion that the prosecution has duly proved the charges against the appellants and they have been rightly held guilty of the same by the trial Court.