Back
PRASANNA B. VARALE, N. R. BORKAR
Ravi @ Dhiren @ Jadhav Ruby Ghosh – Appellant
Versus
National Investigating Agency (N. I. A) – Respondent
JUDGMENT
N.R. Borkar, J. - All these three Appeals are filed against the one and same judgment and order dated 30 January 2014 passed by the Special Court constituted under the National Investigation Agency (N.I.A.) Act of 2008 for Greater Mumbai in Sessions Case No. 674 of 2009. All these Appeals were therefore heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
2. The Appellants, who were accused Nos.1 to 6 before the Trial Court were charged and tried for the offences punishable under Sections 489-B, 489-C, 489-E and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Sections 16, 17 and 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (for short 'UA(P) Act').
3. By the impugned judgment and order, the Trial Court convicted the accused Nos.1 to 6:
(i) For the offence punishable under Section 489-B of the IPC and sentenced them to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.1000/- each;
(ii) For the offence punishable under Section 489-C of the IPC and sentenced them to suffer imprisonment for 7 years and to pay fine of Rs.500/- each;
(iii) For the offence punishable under Section 489-E of the IPC and sentenced them to pay fine of Rs.100/- each;
(iv) For the off
The judgment established the importance of consistent and reliable evidence in proving criminal charges. It also clarified the applicability of specific legal provisions to the accused's actions.
If a class can be found, but the specific words exhaust the class, then rejection of the rule may be favoured because its adoption would make the general words unnecessary; if, however the specific w....
Possession of counterfeit currency requires proof of knowledge or reason to believe the notes are counterfeit; evidence must be recorded accurately to ensure admissibility.
Definition restricts it to counterfeiting of high quality currency. Needless to say that neither the charge-sheet nor the learned Special Court speak of any other terrorist act as defined under S.15(....
Seizure of counterfeit currency notes – Disgrace of criminality is not to be inflicted upon in an individual which is crucial for maintaining public confidence in legal system.
Possession of counterfeit currency requires proof of mens rea; mere possession is insufficient for conviction under relevant IPC sections.
The conflicting interpretations of 'possession' and 'otherwise traffics in' in different judgments led the court to refer the issues to a Larger Bench for decision.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on recoveries and expert testimony to establish guilt in counterfeiting cases, as well as the consideration of circumstances in senten....
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
