SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2006 Supreme(Chh) 305

2006(3) C.G.L.J. 340
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
D.R. Deshmukh, J.

DINESHWARALIAS MUNNA - Appellant
Vs.
STATE OF C.G. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 152 of 2005,
Decided on : 12.5.2006.

Advocates appeared:
Smt. Fouzia Mirza, for the Appellant.
Shri Ashish Shukla, Government Advocate, for the State.

The necessity of proving resemblance to deceive in counterfeiting cases and the burden of proof on the prosecution.

Headnote:

Counterfeit - Criminal Conspiracy - I.P.C. 28, 489-A, 489-C, 489-D, 120-B - The judgment discusses the definitions and elements of counterfeiting under Sections 28, 489-A, 489-C, 489-D of the Indian Penal Code. It highlights the necessity of resemblance to deceive, burden of proof on the prosecution, and the presumption of intention or knowledge in counterfeiting cases.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant was convicted under Sections 489-A, 489-C, 489-D, and 120-B I.P.C. for possession of counterfeit currency notes and criminal conspiracy. The prosecution failed to prove the resemblance of the seized notes to genuine currency notes and the involvement of the appellant in counterfeiting.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the prosecution failed to establish the resemblance of the seized notes to genuine currency notes and the appellant's involvement in a criminal conspiracy. The appellant and co-accused were acquitted, and the appeal was allowed.

Issues: The issues revolved around the resemblance of seized notes to genuine currency, the burden of proof on the prosecution, and the appellant's involvement in a criminal conspiracy.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the necessity of proving resemblance to deceive in counterfeiting cases and the burden of proof on the prosecution. It highlighted the presumption of intention or knowledge in counterfeiting cases and the elements of criminal conspiracy.

Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and the appellant and co-accused were acquitted of all charges.

JUDGMENT

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 27.1.2005 delivered by Shri R.P. Sharma, Additional Sessions Judge, Dharntari in sessions case No.401/2003 whereby the appellant was convicted under Sections 489-A, 489-C, 489D and 120-B I.P.C. and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 10 years, 5 years, 10 years and 5 years respectively and also to pay a fine of Rs.200/- for each offence, in default to undergo additional imprisonment for one month. Co-accused Dr. Arun Sinha, Om Prakash, Dwarika Sahu and Tulsiram Sahu were acquitted.

2. Briefly stated the factual matrix is that the Shri S.K.Dubey, P.W. 11, Station House Officer P.S. Magarlod received secret information that co-accused Dr. Arun Sinha, was having large quantity of counterfeit currency notes in his possession. On the aforesaid information, counterfeit currency notes were seized from Dr. Arun Sinha On the basis of information given by Dr. Arun Sinha counterfeit" currency notes were also seized from co-accused Om Prakash. On the basis of information given by the accused-persons, the police searched the house of the appellant-Dineshwar on 5.8.2003 and seized from the possession of Khilesh Kwnar one printer scanner, copier machine cabinet, one electrical press, one steel cutter, one scissor, one pouch of gum, one wooden scale, one plastic roll, 20sheets of white paper, one plastic scale, 101 counterfeit currency notes of the denomination Rs.100/- bearing same Serial No.2 RW 570092,8 counterfeit currency notes of Rs.100/- bearing serial No. OAS 894304,3 counterfeit currency notes of Rs.100/ - each bearing No. 3PM 874686, two counterfeit currency notes of Rs.100/each bearing serial No. 40C 97770 1,5 counterfeit notes of the denomination of Rs.50/- each bearing serial No.4 MQ 357820 and 50 sheets of plain paper of each on one side of which counterfeit note of Rs.100/- had been printed and one plain sheet of paper on which two counterfeit notes of Rs.100/- bearing serial No. 4A5 894304 vide EX.P.l3.

3. The seized currency notes were sent to the General Manager, Currency Note Press, Nasik Road vide letter dated 11.8.2003 by the Superintendent of Police, Dhamtari for opining whether the seized notes were counterfeit or real. Vide report dated 4.9.2003, no specific opinion was given by the Currency Note Press, Nasik Road as to whether the currency notes were counterfeit or not, No reasons like photographs of Mahatma Gandhi were mentioned to show that the notes resembled with the genuine currency notes of the denomination of Rs.100/and Rs.50/-. Neither the memo of Superintendent of Police nor the report of Currency Note Press was tendered in evidence or exhibited. The currency notes alleged to have been seized from the house of Dineshwar were also not produced before the trial Court and consequently were also not exhibited as articles during the evidence led by the prosecution.

4. The appellant abjured the guilt, pleaded innocence and led no evidence in defence. The prosecution examined as many as 12 witnesses. Relying upon the testimony of the Sub-Inspector S.K. Dubey P.W.11 and the evidence of Santosh Kumar Deshmukh P.W.6, the learned trial Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforesaid.

5. Smt. Fouzia Mirza, learned counsel for the appellant argued that the conviction of the appellant under Section 489-A, 489-C, 489-D and under Section 120-B was liable to be set aside as neither the report of Currency Note Press, Nasik Road was tendered in evidence nor the articles to wit the currency notes alleged to have been seized from the appellant Dineshwar were produced and exhibited before the trial Court by the prosecution. It was also argued that seizure memo Ex.P.13 does not show that any computer or photocopier which are the main instruments to facilitate printing of currency notes, were seized. It was also urged that there was no evidence to show that the currency notes alleged to have been seized from the house of Dineshwar resembled with the genuine c































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top