At the stage of framing charges, the court's role is restricted to determining whether a prima facie case exists based on available materials. A mini-trial is impermissible; disputed evidentiary issues or procedural objections regarding investigation must be resolved during the trial phase.

JUDGMENT :

SAURABH BANERJEE, J.

1. By way of the present petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner seeks setting aside of the orders dated 23.11.2023 and 11.12.2023 passed by the learned ASJ-02, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi Hereinafter “learned Trial Court” in SC No.442/2022 entitled ‘State vs. Aniqul Islam & Ors.’ insofar as it directs framing of charges under Sections 489B/489C/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 Hereinafter “IPC” read with Section 16 of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, 1967 Hereinafter “UAPA” against the petitioner.

2. Briefly put, on 17.06.2022, a secret information was received that two persons, namely Sahim and Anikul Islam, were involved in supply of Fake Indian Currency Notes Hereinafter “FICN” after procuring them from the present petitioner and Kasim for delivering them to one Rahis between 11:00 AM and 12:30 PM near Dilshad Garden Metro Station. As such, thereupon, a raiding team was constituted and upon identification by the informer, Sahim and Anikul Islam were apprehended. During personal search, one black polythene from each of them was recovered from the left pocket of their jeans, both containing one bundle of Rs.2,000/- denomination currency notes, containing 100 leaves/ notes each, wrapped in paper with distinct markings. The notes appeared to be counterfeit on cursory examination. Both accused were apprehended along with the recovered currency, and the present FIR under Sections 489B/489C IPC came to be registered.

3. During investigation, the co-accused persons in their statements disclosed that they use to procure the FICN from the present petitioner and Kasim, both residents of West Bengal. Thereafter, on 06.07.2022, the recovered FICN were sent to the Currency Note Press, Nashik for expert examination. As per its report dated 27.07.2022, all 200 currency leaves/ notes of Rs.2,000/- denomination were found to be high-quality counterfeit, with key security features closely imitated. Thereafter, on 10.08.2022, as per procedure and after obtaining approval from the competent authority, Section 16 of the UAPA was added to the present FIR.

4. Based on the disclosure statements of the co-accused persons, the present petitioner was apprehended on 01.11.2022. Upon search, one bundle of Rs.2,000/- denomination currency notes containing 10 leaves/ notes was recovered. Thereafter, on 24.11.2022, the recovered FICN were also sent to the Currency Note Press, Nashik for expert examination. As per its report dated 25.11.2022, all 10 currency leaves/ notes of Rs.2,000/- denomination were once again found to be high-quality counterfeit, with key security features closely imitated.

5. After filing of the chargesheet on 14.09.2022, and supplementary chargesheet on 27.01.2023, the charges against the accused persons including the petitioner were framed by the learned Trial Court vide order dated 23.11.2023 and formal charge vide order dated 11.12.2023 was framed.

6. Hence, the present petition seeking setting aside of the impugned orders dated 23.11.2023 and 11.12.2023 passed by the learned Trial Court.

7. Before this Court, learned counsel for the petitioner primarily submitted that a case under the UAPA is not made out against the petitioner as a perusal of the supplementary chargesheet clearly reflects that the petitioner was allegedly apprehended and recovery was made by a team led by a Sub-Inspector, which is violative of the provisions contained under Section 43 of the UAPA, since the investigation can only be