JUDGMENT

1. This is a Government appeal from a decision of the learned Sessions Judge of Fyzabad, by which he allowed an appeal by two men, Sangram and Bhagwan Das, who are Sonars by caste and are brothers. Bhagwan Dasis the elder, being 45 years of age, and Sangram is the younger, being 35. They had been convicted by a First Class Magistrate of the Fyzabad District under Section 242, I.P.C., and Bhagwan Das had also been convicted under Section 240, I.P.C. Section 242, as the learned Sessions Judge pointed out, was a mistake for Section 243. The phraseology of the charge-sheet specifically referred to King's coin. The allegations were that on a search being made of the accused's premises, there were first of all found in a locked box, of which Sangram had the key, 11 circular pieces of silver of the size of a rupee. Afterwards, in another room, which was locked, and of which also Sangram had the key, there was found under some bhusa a box containing 30 counterfeit rupees all with the date 1903 upon them. Two other rupees of that same year were, according to the prosecution, recovered from the possession of two Chamars, named Badal and Jhullar, to whom they had been paid, according to those witnesses, by Bhagwan Das. The evidence on that point however has been rejected by the learned Sessions Judge, and we are not prepared to say that his finding on that point was clearly perverse or unreasonable. We therefore do not think it necessary to interfere as regards the charge under Section 240, I.P.C. against Bhagwan Das. As regards the charge against him under Section 242, I.P.C., which should, as we have said, have been properly under Section 243, I.P.C., we also do not think it necessary to interfere, since, as has been mentioned already, the keys of the box in which the 11 silver pieces were found and of the kothri in which the counterfeit rupees were found, were in the possession of the other accused, Sangram, and we therefore agree that those articles must be regarded as having been in possession of Sangram, and not in that of Bhagwan Das. As regards Bhagwan Das therefore we see no reason to interefere, and the appeal against his acquittal is dismissed. He will forthwith be released.

2. As regards Sangram however the case is different. As we have said, the 11 pieces of silver and the 30 counterfeit coins must be regarded as having been in his possession. The question is whether a sufficient presumption arises from the circumstances of the case, taken as a whole, to warrant his conviction under Section 243, I.P.C., in the absence of any adequate explanation by him of the circumstances appearing in the evidence against him. The learned Sessions Judge has found that Sangram was in possession of the coins, and that the coins were counterfeit of King's coins. As he pointed out however it had also to be established that the accused was in possession of the coins fraudulently or with intent to defraud, and that at the time he became possessed of them he knew them to be counterfeit. As to this latter point the lower Court expressed no positive opinion. As to the point whether the accused was in possession of the coins fraudulently or with intent to defraud, he was of opinion that it could not be presumed that Sangram was in possession of them fraudulently or with intent to defraud. He said:

It is quite possible that he may have purchased them at a bargain intending to melt them and utilize the silver in preparing ornaments.

3. Taking this view, and holding therefore that one of the necessary elements for the purposes of the charge was not made out, the learned Sessions Judge ac-quitted Sangram. In our opinion, the finding of the 11 silver pieces of the size of a rupee, along with the finding of 30 counterfeit rupees, all bearing the same year, and concealed under bhusa in a locked room, creates a presumption of Iguilt, in the case of Sangram, having regard to the principles Lald down in Section 114, Evidence Act. The reasons given in p