IMPORTANT POINT
The central legal point established in the judgment is the significance of mens rea in offenses under Section 489B of the Indian Penal Code, emphasizing the requirement for the prosecution to prove that the accused knowingly possessed forged or counterfeit currency notes.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. P. Kataki, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. B.B. Gogoi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam.

2. This appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed by the appellant, Sri Dimbeswar Boro impugning the judgment and order dated 05.01.2011, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Kamrup, Guwahati in Sessions Case No. 133(K) of 2009, whereby, the appellant was convicted under Section 489B of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for two months.

3. The facts relevant for consideration of the instant appeal, in brief, are as follows:-

i. That on 24.02.2005, one Md. Sukur Ali had lodged an FIR (First Information Report) before the Officer-In-Charge of Boko Police Station, inter-alia, alleging that on that day, the appellant Dimbeswar Boro was apprehended and was confined in the office room of Balijan Bazar Committee while he was purchasing goods in the market by giving some counterfeit currency notes of Rs.100/-.

ii. On receipt of the said FIR, the Officer-In-Charge of Boko Police Station registered Boko P.S. Case No. 39/2005 under Section 489B of the Indian Penal Code and initiated the investigation.

iii. During the course of the investigation, the Investigating Officer recorded the statement of the appellant and some more currency notes were recovered from the house of the appellant. Altogether 47 numbers of fake currency notes were recovered from the house of the appellant. The said currency notes were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Guwahati for examination and after completion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer laid the charge-sheet under Section 489B of the Indian Penal Code against the present appellant. Since the offence under Section 489B of the Indian Penal Code is exclusively triable by the court of sessions, the committal court, i.e. the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup committed the case to the court of learned Sessions Judge, Kamrup, Guwahati for trial and accordingly, Sessions Case No. 133(K) of 2009 was registered.

iv. The appellant, who was on bail during the trial, appeared before the trial court to face trial. The trial court after considering the materials on record framed formal charge under Section 489B of the Indian Penal Code against the appellant. When the said charge was read over and explained to the appellant, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution side adduced the evidence of total 8(eight) numbers of prosecution witnesses. The appellant was examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 during which he pleaded his innocence and has also stated that he was not aware that the currency notes which he was possessing were fake. He has also stated in the answer to the question No. 13 that he sold 20 bags of betel nut at the rate of Rs.1250/- per bag to the buyers and those currency notes were given to him by the buyers along with the money paid by them for the price of betel nut, which were later on found to be fake. However, he did not know the same to be fake. The appellant did not adduce any evidence in his defence. However, by the judgment which has been impugned in this appeal, the trial court convicted and sentenced the appellant in the manner as already described hereinbefore.

4. Before considering the submissions made by learned counsel for both the sides, let me go through the evidence which is available on record.

5. PW-1, Md. Sukur Ali, who is the first informant of this case has deposed that in the year 2005, when he was the Secretary of Balijan Bazar Committee, on the day of the occurrence of incident, he was present in the office of the Balijan Bazar Committee and at that time he heard commotion in the market and when he went out he saw that the appellant h