K. Ramakrishnan, J.

1. The accused in S.C.No.314/2003 on the file of the Third Additional Sessions Court (Adhoc), Thrissur is the appellant in Crl.A.No.135/2004 and the second accused in the same case is the appellant in Crl.A.No.114/2004.

2. The case of the prosecution in nutshell was that on 30.5.1997 at about 7.15 p.m near Vadakkumnatha temple, Thrissur the first accused was found to be in possession of 100 counterfeit currency notes of the denomination of Rs.100/- and when questioned it was revealed that he had received the same from accused 2 to 4 and the second accused was also found to be in possession of hundred such counterfeit currency notes which were in their possession for the purpose of using the same as genuine and sell the same or distribute the same and thereby all of them have committed the offence punishable under Sections 489 (B) and (C) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. After investigation, final report was filed and it was taken on file as C.P.No.11/2003 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Thrissur and the learned Magistrate had committed the case to the Sessions Court, Thrissur where it was taken on file as S.C.No.314/2003 and the same was made over to the Third Additional Sessions Court for disposal.

4. When the accused including the appellants appeared before the court below, after hearing both sides, charge under sections 489 (B) and (C) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code was framed against all the four accused persons and the same was read over and explained to them and they pleaded not guilty. In order to prove the case of the prosecution, Pws 1 to 10 were examined and Exts.P1 to P9, P4(a) and (b) and Mos1 and 2 series were marked on the side of the prosecution. After closure of the prosecution evidence, the accused were questioned under Section 313 of the Code and they denied all the incriminating circumstances brought against them in the prosecution evidence. They have further stated that they have not committed any offence and no contraband articles were seized from their possession and they have been falsely implicated in the case. Since the evidence in this case did not warrant an acquittal under Section 232 of the Code, the accused were called upon to enter on their defence by the learned Additional Sessions Judge but no defence evidence was adduced on their side except marking of Exts.D1 to D6 contradictions in the evidence of Pws 5 and 7. After considering the evidence on record, the learned Additional Sessions Judge had acquitted accused 3 and 4 giving them the benefit of doubt under Section 235 of the Code. But the learned Sessions Judge found the appellants guilty under Sections 489 (B) and (C) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and also to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- each, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year each for the offence under Section 489 (B) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years each under Section 489 (C) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and directed the substantive sentences run concurrently. Aggrieved by the same, these appeals were filed by the appellants/accused 1 and 2 before the court below respectively.

5. Since both these appeals arose out of the same judgment, this Court felt that both the appeals can be disposed of by a common judgment.

6. Heard both sides.

7. Sri. Vijaya Bhanu, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants in both the cases submitted that there are contradictions in the evidence of Pws 1 and 2 regarding the seizure of the contraband article from the possession of the appellants. Further, mere possession of counterfeit currency notes alone is not sufficient to attract the offence under Section 489 (B) of the Indian Penal Code and it must be proved by the prosecution that it was intended to be sold or distribute