The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; lack of evidence and established contradictions led to the acquittal.

JUDGMENT :

HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.

1. By way of present acquittal appeal, the appellant-State, under Section 378 of the CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE , 1973, has assailed the judgment and order of acquittal dated 09.01.1998, recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kutch-Bhuj in Sessions Case No. 80 of 1992 wherein the learned Judge has acquitting the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 489(A), (B), (C) and (D), 34, 171 read with Section 114 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE .

2. During the pendency of the appeal, accused Nos. 2 and 3 expired. Hence, the appeal stands disposed of as abated qua the accused Nos. 2 and 3.

3. It is the case of the prosecution that on June 8, 1992, at around 8:30 a.m, an intelligence report was received by PSI, Mr. R.G. Rathod of Kutch-Bhuj, that accused No. 1 had fake US Dollar and Indian Currency Notes. Therefore, a raid was conducted, and 135 counterfeit dollars were recovered from the residential premises of accused No. 2. On the same date, at 7:30 p.m. counterfeit dollars were recovered from the residential premises of accused No. 3. Similarly, counterfeit dollars were recovered from other accused persons, who used to sell the counterfeit dollars. One file was also recovered, and after investigation, a charge-sheet was filed. The learned Sessions Judge has confirmed the charges under Sections 489(A), (B), (C), and (D), 34 read with Section 114 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE . Accused Nos. 5 and 6, although not in the police department, impersonated police officers, threatened deceased accused No. 2, and were involved in the illegal transportation of the counterfeit dollars. Consequently, an offence was also registered against them.

4. Being aggrieved by the same, the appellant State has preferred the aforesaid Criminal Appeal before this Court.

5. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.

6. Learned APP appearing for the State has reiterated and urged the grounds mentioned in the memo of appeal. Learned APP has taken this Court through the paper book and evidence on record and argued that the judgment and order of the trial Court is against the provisions of law as the trial Court has not properly considered the evidence led by the prosecution and looking to the provisions of law itself, it is established that the prosecution has proved all the ingredients of alleged charges against the present respondents. The learned APP also submits that during the raid, counterfeit dollars and a file were found at the residential premises of the accused persons. The prosecution clearly proved on record that the currency was forged, and the FSL report was also produced. The accused were fully aware that the currency notes were forged. Accused Nos. 5 and 6 had impersonated police officers, despite not being in the police department. They wore police uniforms and indulged in illegal activities. However, the learned trial court acquitted the accused persons. It is further submitted that the fact that only one witness turned hostile is not a sufficient ground to acquit the accused persons. The learned trial court ought to have appreciated that fake currency and even police uniforms were found at the residence of the accused persons. It is further contended that learned trial Judge has not appreciated the evidence on record in its proper perspective and in fact, there was no appreciation of evidence so far and hence, the impugned judgment and order of acquittal is required to be reversed as such.

7. On the other hand, learned advocate for the respondent has argued that the learned trial Court has elaborately dealt with the evidence on record and rightly recorded the finding and