2011 Supreme(Cal) 1190

HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
J.N. PATEL, ASHIM KUMAR ROY, JJ.
Monojit Raju Sood @ Manjit Raju Sood - Appellant
Versus
State Of West Bengal - Respondent
C.R.A. No.760 of 2005
Decided on : Aug 29, 2011

Headnote:

CRIMINAL LAW - Forgery - Counterfeit Currency - [Sections 489B/489C/489D and 420 of Indian Penal code] - HELD, the prosecution has proved that the appellant-accused has handed over the forged currency notes to the complainant, as except of the bare words of the complainant, there is no other evidence to show that the forged currency notes were given to the complainant by the appellant-accused.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant was tried in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Fast Track Court, Kolkata, in Sessions Case No. 13 of 2004 on a charge for having committed an offence under Sections 489B/489C/489D and 420 of Indian Penal code. The complainant, Siddharth Banthia, runs a travel agency business under the name and style of Global Connexions at 196, Old China Bazar Street, first floor, Room No. 30, Kolkata-700 001. On 5.10.2003 at about 11.00 hrs., the appellant-accused Monojit Raju Sood came to the office of the complainant and asked him to arrange 5 air tickets, foreign exchange of 10,000 US$ for himself and 4 others for traveling to Bangkok on 9.10.2003. The complainant arranged 10,000 US$ from his known licence holder, M/S N.P.R Finance Limited, and also arranged for 5 air tickets for the appellant-accused and others on the assurance that he will be paid sum of Rs.4,00,000/- immediately and balance would be given after a day. On 7.10.2003 around 2 p.m. the complainant met the accused at the crossing of Kid Street and Sudder Street. The appellant-accused handed over 4 sealed bundles of currency notes each of denomination of Rs. 1,000/-, against the air tickets and foreign exchange. On his return to the office the complainant realised that except for the G.C. notes of the denomination of Rs. 1,000/- on the top of 4 bundles of G.C. notes, all other remaining currency notes appeared to be forged. Therefore, the complainant called the appellantaccused on his mobile Cell No. 9831071444 and informed him that he had given him forged currency notes. However, he was assured that the appellant-accused on reaching at the Super Guest House at Free School Street, (where he was staying) in half-an-hour would settle the same. Accordingly, the complainant went to the said Guest House and waited for the appellant-accused for 2 hours but he did not turn up and thereafter came to know that the appellant-accused had already checked out at 12.30 p.m. with all his belongings. The complainant thereafter realized that he had been cheated by the appellant-accused who dishonestly induced him to deliver 5 air tickets and 10,000 US$ against forged currency notes of Rs. 3,96,000/- and by not paying the balance amount of Rs. 50,000/-. Therefore, on the next day, i.e. 8.10.2003, the complainant lodged a written complaint to the Deputy Commissioner of Police who referred the matter to the Officer-in- charge of the Anti Cheating Section of Detective Department, Kolkata Police, Lalbazar. The said complaint was treated as F.I.R. and came to be registered as New Market P.S. Case No. 313 dated 8.10.2003 under Sections 489B/489C/489D/ 420 and 120B I.P.C against the appellant-accused by S.I. P.C. Ghosh.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the prosecution has proved that the appellant-accused has handed over the forged currency notes to the complainant, as except of the bare words of the complainant, there is no other evidence to show that the forged currency notes were given to the complainant by the appellant-accused. The court also found that the appellant-accused was in possession of the machine, viz., HP 1210 Scanner Machine, which can be used for forging currency notes, and in the opinion of Dr. P. Sinha (P.W.20) on the basis of the test carried out by him the HP Scanner machine (Ext. D) is capable of being used to produce such forged currency notes as contained in packet E.

Issues: Whether the prosecution has proved that the appellant-accused has handed over the forged currency notes to the complainant.

Ratio Decidendi: The prosecution has proved that the appellant-accused has handed over the forged currency notes to the complainant, as except of the bare words of the complainant, there is no other evidence to show that the forged currency notes were given to the complainant by the appellant-accused.

Final Decision: Appeal dismissed.