Point of Law: unless the evidence adduced in the case is consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused and is inconsistent with that of his innocence, the court should refrain from recording a finding of guilt of the accused.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. C. Lalfakzuala learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as Mrs. Linda L. Fambawl, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Mizoram. The appellant has challenged the impugned Judgment & Order dated 19.02.2019 passed by the District & Sessions Judge, Aizawl in SC No. 234 of 2015, by which the appellant has been convicted under Section 489-C Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo 3 years Rigorous Imprisonment with a fine of Rs.1.00 lakh (rupees one lakh), in default S.I. for 6 months, vide Sentence Order dated 05.03.2019

2. Brief facts of the case is that a written FIR was submitted at the Police Station on 4.7.2015 by S. Sithlou, Superintendent, Anti Smuggling Unit, Customs, Aizawl, stating that on the basis of information received on 2.7.2015, a combined team of the Customs Anti-Smuggling Unit, Aizawl and troops of the Border Security Force arrested Lalramchuana, S/o Zarzoliana (L), Bawngkawn Durtlang Road, Aizawl on the same day on the World Bank road, at Falkawn, Aizawl. They recovered 970 (nine hundred seventy) fake Indian currency notes (FICNs) from him, each having a nominal denomination of Rs. 1,000/-(Rupees one thousand). The fake notes were seized by the Customs. Lalramchuana was detained by them and remanded to Customs custody with the permission of Court. On receipt of the FIR, Bawngkawn Police Station Case No. 142/15 dated 4.7.2015 under Section 489-C of the Indian Penal Code was registered and investigated into. The informant and a number or witnesses were examined. The 970 seized FICNs of nominal value Rs.9.70 lakhs in total which had been seized by the Customs in connection with C.No.03/CL/IMP/CUS/AS-AIZ/15-16 dated 2.7.2015 under the Customs Act, 1962, produced by the informant, were re-seized at the Bawngkawn Police Station and a seizure memo was prepared. The accused, Lalramchuana, was arrested and forwarded to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aizawl with a prayer to have his statement recorded by a judicial Magistrate under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The seized notes were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Aizawl for examination. A report received from the laboratory stated that the notes were counterfeit and the investigation revealed that the accused had been in possession of counterfeit currency notes knowing them to be counterfeit and intending to use them as genuine, the Charge sheet was then submitted, and he was accordingly sent for trial charged under section 489-C IPC.

3. The Chargesheet included a list of six witnesses on whom the prosecution proposed to rely. Among the documents forwarded along with the Chargesheet were a seizure inventory prepared by the informant, Customs Department, a Questionnaire statement recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962, the report of the Forensic Science Laboratory and a confessional statement of the accused under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

4. The trial court framed charge against the accused under section 489’C’ IPC on 25.04.2016 to which the accused pleaded not guilty and asked for trial. Thereafter the trial court listed the points for determination as under;

(i) Whether notes suspected to be FICNs were seized from the possession of the accused on 2.7.2015?

(ii) If so, whether the notes seized were FICNs, or whether there were procedural defects that would prevent such a determination?

(iii) If the notes were FICNs, whether the accused had knowledge or reason to believe the same to be forged or counterfeit and intended to use the same as genuine or that they may be used as genuine?

(iv) If so, what punishment would be appropriate in the circumstances of the case ?

5. The trial court examined 6(six) nos. prosecution witnesses The accused on examination under section 313 Cr.P.C denied any knowledge that the currency notes seized were fake currency. The evidentiary value of the statement of the accused recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962, produced in evidence by PW2 as Exbt.