IMPORTANT POINT
Mens rea is essential for conviction under Section 489C of the IPC; mere possession of counterfeit notes is insufficient without proof of knowledge or intent.

JUDGMENT :

Ananya Bandyopadhyay, J.

1. This appeal is preferred against judgment dated 29.08.2012 and order dated 30.08.2012 passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, 5th Court, Krishnagar, Nadia in Sessions Trial No. IV(August), 2011 arising out of Sessions Case No. 15(8) 2010 convicting the appellant under Section 489C of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced imprisonment for 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-in default to suffer imprisonment for 1 year.

2. The prosecution case narrated on 03.05.2010 Officer-in-Charge of Chapra Police Station PW-10 S.I. Anupam Chakraborty on secret telephonic information went to Bangaljhi Chowrasta with other police people and apprehended the appellant who stood at the side of Krishnagar Karimpur Road at Bangaljhi Chowrasta. The body of the appellant was searched 95 numbers of Indian Currency Notes of denomination of Rs.500/-each from the left pocket of the trouser of the appellant were recovered. The complainant S.I. Anupam Chakraborty seized the said recovered currency notes at the spot under seizure list in presence of the local witnesses after obtaining the signatures of the appellant and the witnesses on the said currency notes. On return to Chapra Police Station along with the appellant and the Officer-in-Charge of the Police Station (PW-10) S.I. Anupam Chakraborty lodged a suo-moto complaint at the police station against the appellant and initiated Chapra Police Station Case No. 202/2010 dated 03.05.2010 under Section 489B/489C of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The Investigation Officer (PW-11) S.I. Anup Kumar Samanta after completion of investigation submitted charge-sheet under Section 489B/489C of the Indian Penal Code against the appellant.

4. Charges under Section 489B/489C of the Indian Penal code were framed against the appellant who pleaded not guilty of the charge and claimed to be tried.

5. Considered the rival contentions of the Learned Advocate for the appellant as well as the State.

6. A circumspection of the prosecution witnesses revealed as follows:

i. PW-10, the S.I. of Police, posted at Chapra P.S. as O/C deposed that on 03.05.2010, he lodged a suo motor written complaint at Chapra P.S. in connection with recovery of 95 fake currency notes of denomination of Rs.500/-each from the possession of the appellant Aitulla Sheikh. PW-10 received a source information and proceeded to Bangaljhi Chowrasta accompanied by PW-1, PW-2, PW-5, PW-6, PW-7 and PW-8. On their arrival at the spot, the source identified the accused person from a distance. They apprehended the appellant at the spot in the presence of local witnesses and issued him a notice. The said notice was marked as Exhibit-4. The body of the accused was searched in presence of the witnesses and recovered 95 number of fake currency notes of denomination of Rs.500/-each from his possession. On interrogation, the accused confessed the recovered currency notes to be fake which he collected from Bangladesh through Hridaypur Indo Bangladesh Border, further confessing his endeavour to circulate the said currency notes as genuine. PW-10, thereafter, seized the said fake currency notes in presence of the witnesses under a seizure list at the spot. He obtained the signatures of the appellant and the witnesses on the seizure list as well as on the seized fake currency notes. PW-10 arrested the appellant, and returned to Chapra P.S. along with the alamats. The said seizure list was marked as Ext.-1/14. The currency notes were marked as Mat. Ext. XCIV. The written complaint was marked as Ext.5. The formal F.I.R. was marked as Exhibit-6. PW-10 endorsed S.I. Anup Kumar Samanta to investigate the case. PW-10 further deposed the local witnesses, who helped them to seize the said currency notes from the possession of the accused, were Siraj Sheikh and Bablu Garai, who went to the spot by police jeep.

ii. During his cross-examination it was not possible for PW-10 to disclose the details of source informer as it was a confidential issue. G.D.