Back
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
PRAKASH D. NAIK, J
Pramod Radhakisan Thakre – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.497 OF 2019 | Sessions Case No.145 of 2009
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.Aniket Vagal
For the Respondents: Ms.P.N. Dabholkar
Burden of proof lies with the prosecution to establish knowledge and possession of counterfeit notes beyond reasonable doubt; evidence must be substantive, not merely circumstantial.
Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Section 489(c) - Conviction for counterfeiting currency - Appellant was convicted and sentenced to seven years’ rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.25,000/- - Prosecution failed to prove possession of counterfeit notes - Acquitted for Sections 489(a) and 489(b). (Paras 1, 4, 30)
(B) Evidence - Burden of proof - The prosecution must establish connection and culpability for conviction, particularly possession of counterfeit notes, beyond reasonable doubt - The appellant's ownership of the vehicle was insufficient for conviction without clear evidence of knowledge. (Paras 8, 24)
Facts of the case:
The appellant was implicated in a counterfeit currency operation wherein fake notes were found in his vehicle and a shop. The evidence presented raised issues regarding the validity of police procedures and the reliability of witness testimonies. (Paras 2, 21, 33)
Findings of Court:
The trial court convicted the appellant under Section 489(c) due to insufficient evidence linking him directly to the counterfeit operations; however, significant discrepancies in evidence led to appeal suspension. Conviction upheld but modified sentence to time already served. (Paras 12, 34)
Issues: The main issues included whether the appellant knowingly possessed counterfeit currency and the evidentiary value of witness statements regarding his actions. (Paras 7, 32)
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the necessity of substantive and corroborative evidence linking the appellant to the crime, invalidating assumptions based on possession alone. Discrepancies in the investigation process were highlighted. (Paras 26, 30, 33)
Result: Criminal Appeal No.497 of 2019, partly allowed; conviction maintained but sentence reduced to time served.
This Appeal is preferred under Section 374 of Cr.P.C., challenging the judgment and order dated 15th March, 2019, passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge–6, Nashik, in Sessions Case No.145 of 2009, convicting the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 489(c) read with 34 of Indian Penal Code (“IPC”, for short), and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fne of Rs.25,000/-, and in default, to suffer simple Digitally signed by RAJESHRIR PRA AJE KS AH SR HI imprisonment for one year.
2 The case of the prosecution is as follows: Senior P.I. Mr.A.T. Powar attached to Gangapur Police Station, Nashik received information to the effect that some persons are indulging in counterfeiting the currency notes in a shop named as, “Mobile World” owned by one Sanjay Varma situated at D’souza Colony, Near Swami Samarth Chowk, Gangapur road, Nashik, and the counterfeit currency notes are being circulated. On receipt of the information, he summoned police offcers on 19th November, 2008 and informed them about the information received by him. Panchas were called and they were appraised about the information received by him. Thereafter, the police offcers and the panch witnesses visited the said shop. One person who found present at the premises who disclosed his name as Sudhakar Pande (accused no.1) and currency notes having denomination of Rs.1000/-, and half printed notes of Rs.500/- denomination were recovered from the said shop. The instruments, such as, Laptop, LCD, CPU, Laser Printer, xerox machine, lamination machines, paper cutter, ink bottle etc., were also seized and the pananchama in that regard was recorded (Exhibit–57). FIR was recorded with Gangapur police station vide C.R.No.I–226 of 2008, was registered on 20th November, 2008. Accused Sudhakar Pande was arrested. During his custodial interrogation, he gave statement to the police recorded under Section 27 of Indian Evidence Act . He disclosed that Sanjay Varma and Pramod Thakre (appellant) hatched the conspiracy to counterfeit and circulate fake currency notes of the denomination of Rs.1000/- and Rs.500/-, while they were in jail. The notes were counterfeited and kept in Zen Car. Accused Sudhakar Pande, took the police party to D’souza colony and showed the Zen car bearing No.MH–15/AF–5555, which was parked at the said place. On inquiry, the name and address of the owner of the car was disclosed as Pramod Thakre (accused no.3). The currency notes were kept under the back seat of car. There was a Saffron colour bag containing counterfeit notes and having stamp of Mobile World Shop. On search of the car, currency notes of denomination of Rs.1000/-, containing 900 notes were recovered and seized. The driving licence of accused no.3 was also recovered. Panchanama (Exhibit–76–A) was prepared. During the course of investigation, the recovered currency notes were sealed. Thereafter, the currency notes were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory for analysis. The report of FSL was received indicating that all the currency notes were fake. Accused were arrested. On completing investigation charge–sheet was fled for the offences under Sections 489–A, 489–B and 489–C of IPC. The other accused are absconding.
3 Charge was framed by order dated 2nd May, 2015, under Section 489–A read with 34, 489–B read with 34 and 489–C read with 34 of IPC, against the appellant.
4 The prosecution has examined ten witnesses in support of the prosecution case.
5 Vide judgment and order dated 15th March, 2019, the appellant was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 489–C read with 34 of IPC and sentenced to suffer imprisonment and pay fne, as stated hereinabove. The appellant was acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 489–A and 489–B of IPC.
6 During the pendency of Appeal, the appellant preferred Criminal Application No.486 of 2019, for suspension of sentence and grant of bail. This Court by order dated 25th June, 2019, re
