The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove mens rea and the possession and use of counterfeit notes beyond reasonable doubt in cases involving offences under Section 489B and Section 489C of the Indian Penal Code.

JUDGMENT

Anuja Prabhudessai, J. - This appeal is directed against the Judgment and Order dated 21st January 2019 in Sessions Case No.420 of 2016, Greater Mumbai.

2. By the impugned Judgment, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Mumbai, has held the Appellants (hereinafter referred to as the Accused Nos.1 and 2) guilty of offences under Sections 489 (B) and 489 (C ) read with 34 of Indian Penal Code. They have been sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for ten years with fine of Rs.10,000/-in default six months for offence under Section 489 and five years with fine of Rs.5,000/- in default three months in respect of offence under Section 489 C read with 34 of Indian Penal Code.

3. The case of the prosecution in brief is that on 15th March 2016 PW-1 Arif Khan police Naik attached to Sion Police Station received secret information that two persons from West Bengal were in possession of counterfeit notes. He passed on the information to PW-5, Mr. Santosh Gaikwad, A.P.I. at Sion Police Station. PW-5 arranged a trap and he along with PW-1 and other police personnel proceeded near Krushna Bhuvan, Bus Depot, Sion. They saw one person offering a note of Rs.1,000/-to a taxi driver and later to the owner of a grocery shop and asking them for change. They refused to accept the currency note. While the said person was proceeding to another shop, PW-5 and the other police personnel caught him. PW5 introduced himself and the other members of the police staff and took search of the said person in presence of the panchas and recovered nine notes in denominations of Rs.1,000/- each from the said person. The said notes, which appeared to be counterfeit notes, were seized under Panchanama.

4. Accused No.2 was arrested on 17th March 2016. Pursuant to the disclosure statement made by him, 10 currency notes of Rs.1,000/- denomination were recovered from his house and seized under Panchanama at (Exh.29) drawn in presence of PW-2 Madan Sharma. Investigating Officer recorded statements of the witnesses. The said notes were send to Currency Press Note, Nashik Road for opinion and it was opined that the said notes were counterfeit notes. Upon completion of the investigation, PW-5 filed the chargesheet against both the accused for offences under Section 489B and 489 C of the Indian Penal Code.

5. The accused pleaded not guilt to the charge and claimed to be tried. The prosecution in support of its case examined five witnesses. The statements of the accused were recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The accused No.1 admitted that his personal search was taken near Krushna Bhuvan, Bus Depot, Sion and nine currency notes of denominations of Rs.1,000/- were recovered from his possession and same were seized under Panchanama. He has admitted that these notes are counterfeit notes. The accused No.1 has in fact admitted almost all the incriminating circumstances appearing not only against him but also against accused No.2. The defence of the accused No.2 is total denial.

6. Learned Sessions Judge after considering the evidence on record has observed that the notes which were forwarded to Nasik Press for opinion at Exh. 25 are counterfeit notes. Learned Sessions Judge has further observed that the prosecution has proved that the nine notes were recovered from the possession of accused No.1 whereas 10 counterfeit notes were recovered pursuant to the disclosure statement of accused no. 2. Learned Sessions Judge has taken note of the fact that though the answers given in the statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure cannot be made basis for conviction, the same can be used for appreciating the evidence adduced by the prosecution. Learned Sessions Judge held that the prosecution has proved that the accused were in possession of counterfeit notes and that the accused have not offered any explanation. Learned Sessions Judge therefore, held that the prosecution has proved the essential ingredients of 489B and 48