Back
2007 Supreme(Guj) 103
Gujarat High Court
Judgename :A.M.KAPADIA, K.A.PUJ
MANSING ALIAS GALABHAI FULABHAI VAGHARI (TALPADA) - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT - Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL 1347 Of 2003
Decided On : 02/21/2007
The prosecution must establish the essential elements of the offenses charged, including the accused's involvement in the criminal acts and the requisite criminal intent, in order to secure a conviction.
Headnote:
CRIMINAL APPEALS - [SECTION] 489A, 489B, 489C, 489D IPC - [SUBJECT] COUNTERFEIT CURRENCY - [KEYWORD] POSSESSION OF COUNTERFEIT CURRENCY, CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY, COUNTERFEITING CURRENCY NOTES, CIRCULATION OF COUNTERFEIT CURRENCY, PUNISHMENT FOR COUNTERFEITING CURRENCY NOTES, EVIDENCE OF COUNTERFEITING, INTENTION TO USE COUNTERFEIT CURRENCY AS GENUINE, CRIMINAL INTENT, OVERT ACTS IN CONSPIRACY, PROOF OF CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY, CRIMINAL LIABILITY FOR CONSPIRACY, SENTENCING FOR COUNTERFEITING CURRENCY, MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES IN SENTENCING, REDUCTION OF SENTENCE, APPELLATE REVIEW OF SENTENCE, ACQUITTAL ON APPEAL, MODIFICATION OF SENTENCE ON APPEAL.
Fact of the Case:
Two accused, A-2 and A-7, were convicted by the trial court for offenses related to counterfeiting currency notes under Sections 489a, 489b, 489c, 489d read with Section 114 and 120b of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The prosecution alleged that A-2 was caught with counterfeit currency notes and, based on his statement, A-1 was also apprehended with counterfeit notes. Further investigation led to the recovery of counterfeiting materials from A-1's house and the arrest of A-7, who was found in possession of counterfeit notes with serial numbers similar to those found with A-2. The accused denied the charges and claimed innocence.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court, upon examination of the evidence, found that the prosecution had established the guilt of A-2 and A-7 for possession of counterfeit currency notes (Section 489c IPC) and trafficking in counterfeit currency notes (Section 489b IPC). However, the court held that the prosecution failed to prove the charges of counterfeiting currency notes (Section 489a IPC) and conspiracy to counterfeit currency notes (Section 489d read with Section 114 and 120b IPC). The court reasoned that there was no direct or circumstantial evidence to establish that A-2 and A-7 were involved in the counterfeiting process or had conspired to do so.
Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution had established the guilt of A-2 and A-7 for the offenses under Sections 489a, 489b, 489c, 489d read with Section 114 and 120b IPC? 2. Whether the trial court erred in convicting A-2 and A-7 for the offenses under Sections 489a and 489d read with Section 114 and 120b IPC? 3. Whether the sentence imposed on A-2 and A-7 for the offenses under Sections 489b and 489c IPC was appropriate?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The prosecution failed to establish the guilt of A-2 and A-7 for the offenses under Sections 489a and 489d read with Section 114 and 120b IPC, as there was no direct or circumstantial evidence to prove their involvement in counterfeiting currency notes or conspiring to do so. 2. The trial court erred in convicting A-2 and A-7 for the offenses under Sections 489a and 489d read with Section 114 and 120b IPC, as the prosecution failed to prove the essential elements of these offenses. 3. The sentence imposed on A-2 and A-7 for the offenses under Sections 489b and 489c IPC was excessive, considering their lack of prior criminal record, family circumstances, and the mitigating circumstances presented in their affidavits.
Final Decision: The High Court partly allowed the appeals filed by A-2 and A-7. The court acquitted them of the offenses under Sections 489a and 489d read with Section 114 and 120b IPC, upheld their conviction for the offenses under Sections 489b and 489c IPC, but reduced their sentences to seven years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2,000 for the offense under Section 489b, and five years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2,000 for the offense under Section 489c, with both sentences to run concurrently.
Certainly. Here are the key points derived from the provided legal document:
-
The prosecution must prove the essential elements of the offenses charged, including the involvement of the accused and the criminal intent [judgement_act_referred].
-
The case involved multiple accused persons, with some being convicted and others acquitted based on the evidence presented.
-
The evidence established that A-2 and A-7 were found in possession of counterfeit currency notes of Rs. 50 denomination, with serial numbers matching those recovered from them (!) (!) .
-
Scientific analysis confirmed that the notes recovered from A-2 and A-7 were counterfeit (!) .
-
The police intercepted and arrested A-2 and A-7 while they were in possession of counterfeit notes, and these notes were linked to the conspiracy through serial number matching and recovery of related materials from A-1’s residence (!) (!) .
-
The prosecution witnesses, including police officers and scientific experts, provided credible and corroborated testimony supporting the guilt of A-2 and A-7, despite some witnesses turning hostile (!) (!) .
-
The court found that A-2 and A-7 had knowledge of the counterfeit nature of the notes and possessed them with the intent to use as genuine, which constitutes offenses under sections related to possession and trafficking of counterfeit currency (!) (!) .
-
The evidence did not support the charges of counterfeiting or conspiracy against A-2 and A-7, leading to their acquittal on those counts (!) .
-
The trial court’s conviction for offenses under sections related to trafficking and possession of counterfeit currency was upheld, and sentences were partially reduced based on mitigating circumstances and the accused’s backgrounds (!) (!) .
-
The appeals resulted in quashing the convictions under the conspiracy-related sections and reducing the sentences for the offenses of trafficking and possession, with both accused required to serve a reduced term of imprisonment concurrently (!) (!) .
-
The court emphasized that the credibility of police witnesses and scientific evidence was sufficient to establish the guilt of A-2 and A-7 for the possession and trafficking of counterfeit currency, even if some witnesses turned hostile (!) (!) .
-
The legal principles regarding establishing conspiracy through circumstantial evidence and overt acts were applied, and the absence of direct evidence was noted but not fatal to the prosecution’s case (!) (!) .
-
The court highlighted the importance of considering mitigating circumstances and the accused’s personal backgrounds when determining the extent of punishment (!) (!) .
-
The final judgment partly allowed the appeals, quashing certain convictions and reducing sentences for others, with all substantive sentences to run concurrently (!) (!) .
Please let me know if you need further analysis or specific legal advice based on this case.
( 1 ) THESE two Criminal Appeals under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ( the Code for short) are directed against the judgment and order dated 15. 9. 2003 rendered in Sessions Case No. 24 of 2003 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast track Court, District Kheda at Nadiad by which the appellants of both these appeals, who are original accused Nos. 7 and 2 (A-7 and A-2 for short) respectively, are convicted for commission of the offences punishable under Sections 489a, 489b, 489c, 489d read with Section 114 and also under Section 120b of the Indian Penal Code ( ipc for short) and both of them are sentenced to suffer RI for a period of ten years and fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default of payment of fine, SI for four months for commission of the offence under Section 489a IPC, RI for ten years and fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default of payment of fine, SI for four months for commission of offence under Section 489b IPC, RI for seven years and fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default of payment of fine, SI for four months for the offence under Section 489c IPC, RI for ten years and fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default of payment of fine, SI for four months for commission of offence under Section 489d IPC and RI for six months and fine of Rs. 800/- and in default of payment of fine, SI for one month for the offence under Section 120b IPC. It is also ordered that all the sentences imposed on the accused persons shall run concurrently.
( 2 ) THE prosecution case, as disclosed from the FIR and unfolded during trial, is as under: 2. 1. P. W. 7, Bharatkumar Dahyaram Vaishnav, Police Inspector, Nadiad Town Police Station, District Kheda, had received an information from reliable persons to the effect that prior to 1 months counterfeited currency notes were in circulation. He conveyed the said information to P. W. 22, A. L. Vaghela, PSI and P. W. 20, NM Solanki, PSI and other police personnels of d Staff and they were instructed to make sincere efforts to find out the root thereof. Thereafter prior to three days he received an information about a suspicious person and, therefore, police personnels of D staff were asked to keep continuous vigil and watch on the movement of the said person. He also remained in constant touch with those police personnels. On 4. 7. 2002 he received an information from a reliable informant that one person was going to handover counterfeited currency notes to someone. He, therefore, kept watch with panchas on the road near Mafatlal Apparels railway Crossing at Nadiad Mill Road wherefrom the said person was to pass, as per the information. It is further case of the prosecution that the said person came on a scooter at 3 P. M. from Kamla. He along with other police personnel intercepted him and on being asked his name, he stated that his name is Firozbhai Allarakha, by cast Vora, residing at Kamla, Taluka Nadiad, District Kheda (A-2 ). On making search of his scooter, a bundle of currency notes of Rs. 50/- denomination and other Rs. 250/- (two notes of Rs. 100/- and one note of Rs. 50/-) were found from the pocket of his pant. The bundle of currency notes of Rs. 50 denomination was new and appeared to be counterfeited. On looking into it, there were more notes of one and the same number. While comparing with the original note of Rs. 50 denomination and on verifying the watermark, the said notes appeared to be counterfeited. The said notes were counted and they were hundred in number. The other notes of Rs. 250 were original. The counterfeited notes were as under by segregating as per the numbers: (i) 22 notes of No. 9 R S 312680 (ii) 12 notes of No. 5 D C 214865 (iii)12 notes of No. 5 T U 117837 (iv) 33 notes of No. 4 U B 034459 (v) 18 notes of No. 2 S B 909057 (vi) 04 notes of No. 5 R Q 211629. The registration number of the scooter is GJ 1 AC 989 and the value of the said scooter was about Rs. 5,000/- Therefore, he arrested A-2 with the counterfeited notes in presence of panchas.
2
