Back
2015 Supreme(Del) 1618
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J.
V.K. Jain - Appellant
Versus
C.B.I. - Respondent
Crl.A. 231/2006
Decided on : 24.07.2015
Mr. O.P. Sharma with Ms. Sangita Bhayana and Mr. Vikas Sharma, Advocates.
Ms. Sonia Mathur, Standing Counsel with Mr. Rajat Soni, Advocate.
The judgment establishes the principle that possession of counterfeit currency, without a satisfactory explanation, can lead to the inference of knowledge and intention, resulting in criminal liability under Section 489C of the IPC.
Headnote:
Counterfeit Currency - Criminal Offense - Section 489C of the IPC - [Section 489C in The Indian Penal Code] - Whoever has in his possession any forged or counterfeit currency-note or bank-note, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be forged or counterfeit and intending to use the same as genuine or that it may be used as genuine, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both. The judgment discusses the possession of counterfeit currency, the burden of proof, and the inference of knowledge and intention from the circumstances.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted under Section 489C of the IPC for possessing counterfeit US dollars. The prosecution presented evidence of the raid, recovery of counterfeit currency, and expert opinions confirming the counterfeit nature of the currency. The appellant denied the recovery and failed to provide an explanation for the possession of the counterfeit currency.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the appellant guilty of possessing counterfeit currency based on the evidence presented by the prosecution. The court emphasized the appellant's failure to explain the possession of the counterfeit currency and inferred the requisite knowledge and intention from the circumstances.
Issues: The issues revolved around the possession of counterfeit currency, burden of proof, and the appellant's failure to provide an explanation for the possession of the counterfeit currency.
Ratio Decidendi: The court applied Section 489C of the IPC and emphasized the burden of proof on the prosecution to establish the guilt of the accused. It also invoked Section 106 of the Evidence Act to shift the burden of proving innocence to the appellant, who failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the possession of the counterfeit currency.
Final Decision: The court maintained the appellant's conviction under Section 489C of the IPC and modified the sentence from two years to six months, with no change in the quantum of fine.
Ashutosh Kumar, J.
1. V.K. Jain impugns the judgment and order of conviction dated 21.3.2006 and 24.3.2006 respectively passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi in Sessions Case No.560/1996 arising out of RC No.9/88, SIU-XI, New Delhi whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 489C of the IPC and has been sentenced to undergo R.I for two years, fine of Rs.1000/- and in default of payment of fine simple imprisonment for one month.
2. On 28.10.1987, the premises of the appellant was searched pursuant to the search warrant issued by J.C. Makhija (not examined), Assistant Director, Enforcement Directorate. During the search 1563 US dollars (15 of 100 denomination, 61 of 1 denomination and 1 of two denomination) along with other foreign currency and gold were seized. The aforesaid articles including the currency notes were found kept in a cloth bag which was concealed in the room which was in occupation of the appellant.
3. After the investigation, chargesheet was submitted against the appellant whereupon cognizance was taken and the appellant was put on trial.
4. Eleven witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution in order to bring home the charges under Section 489C of the IPC.
5. Mr. R.N. Mishra (PW.5) who at the relevant time worked as Enforcement Officer in the Enforcement Directorate deposed that search warrants were issued by Sh. J.C. Makhija, the then Assistant Director, Enforcement, to conduct the search in the house of the appellant. With the assistance of other personnels including police men, the house of the appellant was raided and two gold biscuits of 1 kg each and 2 small biscuits weighing about 187 grams and foreign currency (1563 US dollars) plus other miscellaneous currency, undischarged travelers’ cheques and a passport in the name of Mr. Rakesh Kumar Gupta was recovered. The documents and the currency notes were seized and a panchnama was prepared which was signed by the appellant. The photocopy of the panchnama is Ex.PW.3/A. The original panchnama was enclosed in the record of another case against the appellant. The suggestion given to PW.5 regarding non-availability of the appellant at the time of raid was denied. He has categorically stated that the search operation was conducted in front of two witnesses namely Nand Kumar Bagri (PW.1) and Vimla Devi (not examined).
6. S.A. Ali (PW.3), Assistant Director, Enforcement Headquarters who was part of the raiding team deposed before the Court that in front of two independent witnesses, one being a lady, the search was conducted in the house of the appellant. The appellant was available in his house. During the search, documents and currency notes of different denominations of US dollars and gold biscuits were recovered. He has testified to the fact that he has seen the original panchnama which was enclosed with the original record of the Criminal Appeal No.158/1998. He has also supported the fact that the panchnama in question was signed by the appellant.
7. The evidence of R.N. Madan (PW.5) and S.A. Ali (PW.3) clearly establishes that 1563 US dollars were recovered from the house of the appellant when the same was raided on 28.10.1987.
8. R.K. Sharma (PW.2), OSD to the Secretary Revenue, Government of India has deposed that his report regarding seizure of foreign US dollars was sent to S.P, CBI. The report has been exhibited as Ex.PW.2/A. It has been stated by him that prior to sending of the report (Ex.PW.2/A) to CBI, the matter was referred to Crime Branch, Delhi Police. CBI was entrusted with the investigation later on. PW.2 has further deposed that the currency was forged and the Crime Branch and later the CBI was entrusted with the investigation after a report was received from the bank that the seized currency notes were forged.
9. N.C. Verma (PW.9), DIG, CBI, Lucknow has deposed that on 30.12.1988 he received a secret complaint in the hand of R.K. Sharma (PW.2) reporting about the recovery of counterfeit dollars. On his
