Back
ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT AT AMARAVATHI
C. Praveen Kumar, B. Krishna Mohan, JJ.
Md. Rustam Sk - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 46 of 2021
Decided On : 03-08-2021
CRIMINAL APPEAL - BAIL - UNLAWFUL ACTIVITIES (PREVENTION) ACT, 1967 - SECTIONS 16, 18, 18B, 20 - NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY ACT, 2008 - SECTION 21(1)(2)(4) - HABITUAL OFFENDER INVOLVED IN CIRCULATION OF FAKE INDIAN CURRENCY NOTES - SUPPLY OF HIGH QUALITY FAKE INDIAN CURRENCY NOTES - OPENING OF BANK ACCOUNT IN WIFE'S NAME WITH INITIAL AMOUNT OF RS.7,000/- AND LATER HUGE AMOUNTS TRANSFERRED INTO THAT ACCOUNT FROM DIFFERENT BRANCHES OF AXIS BANK - FORENSIC ANALYSIS OF CELL PHONE REVEALED REGULAR TOUCH WITH CO-ACCUSED - NO IGNORANCE OF OFFENCE COMMITTED - BAIL DISMISSED.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, A.2, was arrested for his involvement in the circulation of high-quality fake Indian currency notes (FICN). He was charged under Sections 489B and 489C of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 16, 18, 18B, and 20 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. The appellant had a history of involvement in similar offenses and had been arrested in 2012 in Bengaluru and in 2017 in West Bengal. He was also found to have opened a bank account in his wife's name and received large sums of money from various branches of Axis Bank.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellant was a habitual offender involved in the circulation of FICN. The court also found that the appellant had supplied high-quality FICN worth Rs.40 lakhs to A.3 and others operating in Bengaluru and had also supplied FICN worth Rs.4-5 lakhs to A.1 in a hotel adjacent to New Farakka Railway station. The court further found that the appellant had opened a bank account in his wife's name with an initial amount of Rs.7,000/- and later received huge amounts from different branches of Axis Bank. The court also found that the forensic analysis of the appellant's cell phone revealed that he was in regular touch with A.1, A.3, and A.6.
Issues: 1. Whether the appellant was involved in the circulation of FICN? 2. Whether the appellant was a habitual offender? 3. Whether the appellant had supplied FICN worth Rs.40 lakhs to A.3 and others operating in Bengaluru? 4. Whether the appellant had supplied FICN worth Rs.4-5 lakhs to A.1 in a hotel adjacent to New Farakka Railway station? 5. Whether the appellant had opened a bank account in his wife's name and received large sums of money from various branches of Axis Bank? 6. Whether the forensic analysis of the appellant's cell phone revealed that he was in regular touch with A.1, A.3, and A.6?
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appellant was involved in the circulation of FICN and was a habitual offender. The court also held that the appellant had supplied FICN worth Rs.40 lakhs to A.3 and others operating in Bengaluru and had also supplied FICN worth Rs.4-5 lakhs to A.1 in a hotel adjacent to New Farakka Railway station. The court further held that the appellant had opened a bank account in his wife's name and received large sums of money from various branches of Axis Bank. The court also held that the forensic analysis of the appellant's cell phone revealed that he was in regular touch with A.1, A.3, and A.6. The court concluded that the appellant was not entitled to bail.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appellant's bail application.
JUDGMENT
(Per Hon’ble Sri Justice C. Praveen Kumar)
Heard Sri K. Nithin Krishna, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri N. Harinath, learned Assistant Solicitor General appearing for the 1st respondent.
2. Assailing the order dated 02.12.2020 passed by the Metropolitan Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge for trial of N.I.A. Act Cases at Vijayawada in E-filing Case No.AP/10/CRL.M.P./119393/2020 in S.C.No.273 of 2018 in Rc.No.02/2015/NIA/HYD, wherein the request of the appellant for release on bail was rejected, the present Criminal Appeal came to be filed by the appellant/A.2 under Section 21 (1) (2) and (4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008.
3. The facts of the case are as under:
ii) Basing on the information available, A.2, who is the petitioner/appellant, was arrested on 10.04.2018 in the presence of independent witnesses. During the custodial interrogation, he disclosed his involvement and arrest in 2012 and his release in June, 2015. Thereafter, he returned to his native village Palagachi in Malda, West Bengal, and met one Faruk, who asked him whether he is having any links with the persons involved in procurement/circulation of fake currency notes. It is said that while in custody, A.2 developed contact with A.3 and A.6 and after release he maintained contacts with them. According to him, he provided the mobile number of A.3 to Faruk and also communicated with A.3, by which Faruk will supply fake Indian currency notes to him. The said Faruk also asked the petitioner to open a bank account so that A.2 can receive deposits in lieu of supply of fake Indian currency notes. Accordingly, A.2 opened an account in Axis Bank in July, 2015 in the name of his wife Murtara Bibi with an amount of Rs.7,000/- given by Faruk, and thereafter, a large sums of money came to be transferred from various branches of Axis Bank in the account of the wife of A.2.
iii) It is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner supplied fake Indian currency notes of face value worth Rs.40 lakhs to A.3 and others, operating at Bengaluru. In the month of August, 2015, he provided FICN of face value of Rs.4-5 lakhs to A.1 in a Hotel adjacent to New Farakka Railway station. According to him, from July, 2015 to March, 2016, about Rs.30 lakhs fake Indian currency notes were supplied through A.1, A.3 and A.6. Pursuant to the above statement, one Samsung mobile and five SIM cards w
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
