JITENDRA NATH CHAUDHURI, J. ( 1 ) THIS appeal arises out of sessions Trial No. 1 of September 1979 (Sessions Case No. 30 of 1979) held by the learned Sessions Judge, presiding over the 12th Bench of the City Sessions Court, Calcutta. The appellant was charged under section 489 (c) of the Indian Penal Code for possessing forged Government currency notes knowing or having reason to believe the same to be forged and intending to use the same as genuine or that they may be used as genuine, and was convicted of the offence under section 489 (c) of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to two years rigorous imprisonment, subject to any set off which he might be entitled to under the law. ( 2 ) THE prosecution case in brief is as follows: P. W. 3, Rabi Kumar Khattar, accompanied by one Damodar Prasad Bajaj, whom he had met at Tripti Hotel by the side of his house, met the accused in a small stair case room (Room No. 6) by the side of the lift at Rajasthan Guest House on Zakeria Street on 2/11/1977. The accused gave P. W. 3 four G. C. notes of 10 rupee denomination each. Out of these four notes, identical numbers were borne by two of the notes. The other two bore identical numbers with each other, though a different number to the former two notes. The accused told P. W. 3 that he could double notes and asked him to use the notes in the market and satisfy himself that the same could be passed off. The accused asked him to bring as many notes as possible and he would double the amount. Thereafter P. W. 3 used all the said notes and the same passed off as genuine without any objection from anybody. On 4/11/1977 P. W. 3 again met the accused at the same place. Thereupon the accused asked him to go to Cafe De Monaco on Chowringhee Road near Metro Cinema on 5/11/1977 at about 4 P. M. with money 2nd assured him that be would double the money. Accordingly, P W. 3 went to Cafe De Monaco on 5/11/1977 at about 4 P. M. with 10 G. C. notes of ten rupee denomination each. He met the accused in a cabin of the said Restaurant. Damodar Prasad Bajaj and another person were also present there. Accordingly, P W. 3 went to Cafe De Monaco on 5/11/1977 at about 4 P. M. with 10 G. C. notes of ten rupee denomination each. He met the accused in a cabin of the said Restaurant. Damodar Prasad Bajaj and another person were also present there. P. W. 3 gave the accused Rs. 100/- in the said 10 currency notes of rupee ten denomination each as a test case. The accused left saying that he would bring double the money at once. The accused returned after some time to the cabin. In the meanwhile P. W. 8, S. I. Arun Kumar Mukherjee attached to the Detective Department, Lalbazar, who, on receipt of source information had been keeping watch near Cafe De Monaco along with force, entered and apprehended the accused, Damodar Prasad Bajaj and the other person who was present. Thereafter P. W. 3 was questioned by P. W. 8. Then P. W. 8 searched the person of the accused in the presence of witnesses the seized four pieces of G. C. notes from the chest pocket of the shirt of the accused. Two of the notes bore identical number, while the other two, although they bore a different number, inter se, bore the identical number. P. W. 8 also recovered the Rs. 100. 00, being the ten G. C. notes of the denomination of ten rupees each from the pocket of the part of the accused, which according to P. W. 3 had been given by him to the accused. Thereafter pursuant to the statement of the accused and being led by him P. W. 8 along with the accused and others went to the Rajasthan Guest House on Zakeria Street. From Room No. 6 of the said Guest House P. W. 8 recovered in the present of witnesses and the accused four pieces of G. C. notes often rupee denomination, all bearing the same number from inside an executive diary. After drawing up of suo motu F. I. R. at the Taltala P. S. , P. W. 8 started Taltala P. S. Case No. 520, dated 5/11/1977, inter alia, under section 489c I. P. C. , being the present case. After drawing up of suo motu F. I. R. at the Taltala P. S. , P. W. 8 started Taltala P. S. Case No. 520, dated 5/11/1977, inter alia, under section 489c I. P. C. , being the present case. ( 3 ) AFTER receiving the opinion of the expert relating to the eight pieces of G. C. notes seized from the Forensic Science Laboratory as to the genuineness or otherwise, and upon completion of investigation he submitted a charge-sheet on 13/2/1979 against the present appellant under section 489 (c) of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution case in short is that the accused by pretending to be able to double G. C. notes created a sense of false confidence intending thereby to ultimately defraud the victim after getting hold of as much money as possible. ( 4 ) PROSECUTION has examined eight witnesses. Defence has not examined any witness or filed any written statement. ( 5 ) THE defence case as can be gathered from the cross examination of the witnesses and the answers of the accused in his examination under section 313 Cr. P. C. is that the accused has been falsely implicated. The defence version is that on 5. 11-1977 at about 5. 45 P. M. the accused was going to Elite Cinema when P. W. 8 and other police officers took him in a police van to Lalbazar, tortured him and demanded Rs. 2,000/- from him. As he was unable to satisfy the police, being a poor man, this false case has been started against him. ( 6 ) P. W. 3 is the person who was sought to be defrauded. P. Ws. 2 and 6 are witnesses to the seizures by the police. P. Ws. 1 and 6 are witnesses to the seizure of the G. C. notes at Cafe De Monaco, P. Ws. 2 and 6 are witnesses to the seizure of the G. C. notes at Rajas than Guest House on Zakeria Street. P. Ws. 4 and 5 are the Scientific Officers of the Forensic Science Laboratory who examined the seized G. C. notes in question. P. W. 4 examined the seized G. C. notes seized at the Caf do Monaco. P. W. 5 examined the G. C. Dotes seized from the Rajasthan Guest House. P. Ws. 4 and 5 are the Scientific Officers of the Forensic Science Laboratory who examined the seized G. C. notes in question. P. W. 4 examined the seized G. C. notes seized at the Caf do Monaco. P. W. 5 examined the G. C. Dotes seized from the Rajasthan Guest House. P. W. 7 is a Sub-Inspector of Police who accompanied P. W. 8 at the time of the seizure of the G C. notes from the Cafe De Monaco. P. W. 8 is the Investigating Officer of this case. ( 7 ) THE evidence of P. W. 3 has already been broadly discussed in setting out the prosecution case and so it is not necessary to set out the same again. In cross-examination he has stated that he is a Graduate in Commerce and that he and his younger brother is a partner in a motor-car manufacturing business and that he pays income tax. According to his evidence, he scrutinised the currency notes, which looked to him to be identical. The fact, that two currency notes were bearing the same number raised some suspicion in his mind but he did not bother as he would get double the money. He did not disclose the incident about the doubling of the notes to his relations or friends, nor did he inform the police. He had no difficulty in using the forged notes given to him by the accused at Rajasthan Guest House. He has further stayed in cross examination that on 2-11- 1977 the accused told him that he would give him rupees one lakh if he handed over to the accused rupees fifty thousand. In the small stair-case room by the side of the lift at Rajasthan Guest House, on 4-11-1977 be again met the accused after being satisfied that the notes given by the accused had passed off as genuine, and at that time Damodar Prasad Bajaj and one Badri Singh were also present. He had no talk with Badri Singh. He did not contact the Manager or any bearer regarding the matter and introduced himself as some Agarwalla with wrong address suppressing his original identity so that he might not be entangled in. any future trouble. Badri Singh was cot present in the cabin of Cafe De Monaco. In the Cafe De Monaco one unknown person was present with Damodar Prasad Bajaj and the accused. any future trouble. Badri Singh was cot present in the cabin of Cafe De Monaco. In the Cafe De Monaco one unknown person was present with Damodar Prasad Bajaj and the accused. The police recorded his statement on the day of the seizure. A contradiction was brought on record from the statement made by him to the police under section 161 Cr. P. C. to the effect that he has stated before the police that the police recovered from the pocket of the wearing shirt of the accused the Rs. 100/- which had been paid by P. W. 3 to the accused, and that the forged notes were recovered from the pocket of the pant of the accused by the police, his substantive evidence being that the police recovered the forged notes from the pocket of the shirt of the accused and the Rs. 100/- paid by him to the accused from the pocket of the pant of the accused. He denied the suggestion that the accused was not present at the Cafe De Monaco on 5-11-1977 and that no shirt was seized on that dale from the accused. He also denied the suggestion that he had deposed falsely at the instance of the police. P. W. 6 is a witness to the seizure of the G. C. notes from both Cafe De Monaco and the Rajasthan Guest House. He is a representative of the Distributor, Film Division, and also a broker of plastic goods. On 5-11-1977 he was taking tea in Cafe De Monaco at about 4-30 P. M. when the police after showing their identity card asked him to be a witness to a seizure. Thereafter he witnessed the seizure of the form currency notes from the pocket of the shin of the accused and ten (10) ten- rupee notes from the pocket of the pant of the accused from a cabin inside Cafe De Monaco. He also accompanied the police to the Rajasthan Guest House and there in the presence of the Manager of the Guest House the police seized an executive diary from below the matress inside which four (4) ten-rupee currency notes were found, which were also seized. He signed the seizure lists at both places and the accused also signed the same. The accused had led them to the room from which the executive diary and notes were recovered. He signed the seizure lists at both places and the accused also signed the same. The accused had led them to the room from which the executive diary and notes were recovered. ( 8 ) IN cross-examination he has stated that his monthly income is rupees two hundred to rupees four hundred. He had never seen tile accused before 5-11-1971. In cross-examination it was taken that the accused pointed out the room at the Rajasthan Guest House. He denied the suggestion that he is a pocket witness of the police and deposed falsely as he is a handsman of the police and at their instance. ( 9 ) P. W. 1 is the other witness to the seizure at the Cafe De Monaco. He at the relevant time was an M. A student of the Jadavpore University. On 5-11-1977 at about 4-25 PM he was taking tea at Cafe De Monaco when on being requested by persons who disclosed their identity as police officers he signed some currency notes alleged to have been recovered from the accused. He identified those four currency notes (Material Ext. 1 collectively) in Court and his signatures thereupon. He also identified the shirt in Court (Material Ext. II) as being the shirt which the accused was wearing and was seized at the occasion. According to this evidence he did not see the actual seizure from the possession of the accused of the notes. In cross- examination he denied the suggestion that the accused was not present there at all on that occasion. He stated that he had been examined by the police in connection with this case. ( 10 ) P. W. 2 Ghanashyam Lal Tripathi is the Manager of the Rajasthan Guest House at 19, Zakeria Street. He has deposed that the accused used to frequent the room of one Badri Singh being room No. 6 on the ground floor. On 5-1-1977 the police came to the Guest House along with the accused and another person. Badri Singh was not present. At the instance of the police he opened the lock of room No. 6 in the presence of another witness. The accused brought out an executive diary from below the matress and produced it before the police. Police recovered four currency notes bearing the same number from inside the diary and seized the same under a seizure list, which he signed (Ext. The accused brought out an executive diary from below the matress and produced it before the police. Police recovered four currency notes bearing the same number from inside the diary and seized the same under a seizure list, which he signed (Ext. 9/1 ). He also identified the four currency notes seized on that occasion in Court. ( 11 ) IN cross-examination he stated that he had been Manager for 7 or 8 years and that he lived in the Guest House. His remuneration was rupees five hundred a month. Badri Singh was no longer residing there since he did not return after 5/11/1977 and he did not know his present address. The police recorded his statement. He denied the suggestion that the police did not bring the accused to his Guest House. He also denied the suggestion that the accused did not frequent the room of Badri Singh and that nothing had been recovered from the Guest House on that occasion He further denied that he had subsequently signed the seizure list at the instance of the police at the police station and was deposing falsely under instruction of the police in order to oblige them. ( 12 ) P. W. 4 (Subimal Ghosh) is a Scientific Officer, Questioned Document Section, Forensic Science Laboratory, Government of West Bengal and has deposed as a Foremic Expert. It is his evidence that out of the four pieces of G. C. notes sent to him for examination (these notes had been seized from Cafe De Monaco, according to the, evidence) two pieces had been tampered with by means of a dot pen in respect of the number thereof and that the tampering was discernible even to the naked eye. In all other respects all the four notes were notes genuinely issued by the Government. He denied the suggestion that his examination was unscientific and useless. ( 13 ) P. W. 5 Nirmal Kr. Sinha, is the senior scientific officer of the Forensic Science Laboratory attached to the Questions and Documents Section. He examined four Government Currency Notes seized from the Rajasthan Guest House by the police. He found all four to be genuine Indian Currency Notes of ten rupee denomination. He however, also found that alterations have been made on three of the said notes arid the said three notes had thus been tampered with. He examined four Government Currency Notes seized from the Rajasthan Guest House by the police. He found all four to be genuine Indian Currency Notes of ten rupee denomination. He however, also found that alterations have been made on three of the said notes arid the said three notes had thus been tampered with. In cross examination he denied that his report was unscientific and useless. ( 14 ) THE net result of the examination of the Government Currency Notes by P. Ws. 4 and 5 was that in the case of the notes examined by P. W. 4, i. e, the notes seized from the Cafe De Monaco the alteration of the digits on two of the said four notes led a duplication of numbers. Similarly the result of the alteration of the digits on the three notes as found by P. W. 5 (being the notes seized from Rajasthan Guest House) resulted in all the four notes now bearing the same number. ( 15 ) P. W. 7, S. I. Omit Mazumder in plain dress assisted P. W. 8 in the raid at the Cafe De Monaco. He has deposed as to how the four notes of ten rupee denomination each, two notes bearing the same number and the other two notes bearing another number, were seized from the pocket of the shirt of the accused in the Cafe. He has also deposed as to the seizure of ten rupee notes from the pocket of the trouser of the accused. In cross-examination he denied that he was not in the leading party or that the accused was not present at that place on 5-11-1977. He also denied that the accused was not wearing the shirt in question. ( 16 ) P. W. 8 S. I. Arun Kr. Mukherjee is the 1. 0. of the case. He has deposed that on receipt of a Source information he with force in plain clothes maintained to watch at about 4 P. M. on Cafe De Monaco on Chowringhee Road. He has deposed as to how the accused was searched and four Govt. Currency Notes of ten rupee denomination were recovered from the pocket of the shirt of the accused. He also seized ten rupee notes from the pocket of the trouser of the accused, but did not prepare a separate seizure of the said notes from the trouser of the accused. Currency Notes of ten rupee denomination were recovered from the pocket of the shirt of the accused. He also seized ten rupee notes from the pocket of the trouser of the accused, but did not prepare a separate seizure of the said notes from the trouser of the accused. The accused also signed the currency notes seized along with P. W. 8. Thereafter pursuant to the statement made by the accused in the presence of the accused and P. Ws 2 and 6, from room No. 6 of the Rajasthan Guest House in the Zakaria Street he seized four Government Currency Notes of ten rupee denomination under a seizure list. The said room was opened by P. W. 2 the Manager of the said Guest House. On being pointed out by the accused. The said room was under lock and key. The accused brought out an executive diary from under the bedding and produced it before the police. Inside the said diary not only four pieces of Government Currency Notes of ten rupee denomination each were found, but also a gift coupon in the name of the accused. P. W. 8 as well as accused signed on the notes seized. Thereafter P. W. 8 brought the accused back in custody in the Taltolla Police Station and filed a suo motu F. I. R. which has been marked as Ext. 12 in this case. Thereafter he drew up a formal F. I. R. inter-alia under section 489 (c) I. P. C. and started the present case. All the notes seized from Cafe De Monaco and the Rajasthan Guest House were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory for examination and report. After receiving the Forensic Report and completion of investigation, he submitted charge sheet under section 489 (c) I. P. C. on 13/12/1979 against the present accused only. ( 17 ) IN cross-examination be bas stated that he selected two witnesses who were taking tea inside the restaurant, sitting at different tables, but not in the cabin in question. He got the accused just outside the cabin and apprehended the other two persons inside the cabin. He could not trace out Badri Singh in spite of repeated efforts. He lodged suo motu F. I. R. at 9. 25 pm. at Taltolla Police Station. He denied that he did not arrest the accused at Cafe De Monaco. He got the accused just outside the cabin and apprehended the other two persons inside the cabin. He could not trace out Badri Singh in spite of repeated efforts. He lodged suo motu F. I. R. at 9. 25 pm. at Taltolla Police Station. He denied that he did not arrest the accused at Cafe De Monaco. He further denied that be arrested him near Elite Cinema on that day, or that he forced the accused to sign on the notes at the seizure lists at Lalbazar. He denied the suggestion that the accused did not produce the executive diary from under the bedding. There were two coupons or tickets of Dewali gifts inside the executive diary, one of them being in the name of the accused. He denied the suggestion that the case of co-accused was filed, as he satisfied the demands of the police, and that the accused had been falsely implicated as he could not satisfy the same. He denied that he did not deliberately try to trace out Badri Singh and that the shirt in question was not seized from the accused or that all the seizure lists had been subsequently created in order to falsely implicate the accused. Mr. Mitra, learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that on the facts of this case no case has been made out in law for any offence under section 489 (c) I. P. C. as the ingredients of the said offence have not been satisfied. He further submitted that in any event the prosecution witnesses were not reliable and the defence suggestion that the accused have been falsely implicated because he was unable to satisfy the police was a probable one and in the light of the circumstance of this case should be accepted by the Court. ( 18 ) MR. Chatterjee, learned Advocate appearing for the State has submitted that the requirements of law to bring home the conviction under sec. 489 (G) are satisfied in this case and that there was no basis for the defence suggestion that the accused have been falsely implicated because he had filed to satisfy the police financially. ( 19 ) ON the facts of this particular case the evidence of P. W. 3 has to be treated as the evidence of a person standing on the footing of an accomplice and accordingly we have looked for corroboration. ( 19 ) ON the facts of this particular case the evidence of P. W. 3 has to be treated as the evidence of a person standing on the footing of an accomplice and accordingly we have looked for corroboration. In our view the evidence of P. W. 3 has been sufficiently corroborated ill this case. The circumstance that the accused and P. W. 3 met each other on 5/11/1977 at about 4 P. M. at the Cafe De Monaco is itself an important piece of corroboration, along with the fact that from the pocket of the trouser of the accused ten rupee notes were seized. Both P. Ws. 6 and 8 have stated and that P. Ws. 6, 7 and 8 have stated about the recovery of the said ten rupee notes from the pocket of the trouser of the accused. This lends assurance to the testimony of P. W. 3 that as per previous arrangements with the accused, P. W. 3 gave him money for the purpose of duplication, and that the accused and P. W. 3 had met at the Cafe De Monaco, in the expectation that the accused would double the amount. Further we do not find anything improbable or unworthy in the testimony of P. W. 3. ( 20 ) THE defence suggestion that the witnesses in question arc not reliable have not on the facts been substantiated. Even if we are to discard the testimony of P. Ws. 1 and 6 there will still remain the reliable testimony of P. W. 2, the Manager of Rajasthan Guest House. There is nothing in evidence to show, not even any suggestion, that the Rajasthan Guest House or its manager had ever got into any trouble with the police. He had been the Manager 7/8 years and was earning Rs. 500/- per month. There was no suggestion of any enmity between P. W. 2 and the accused. He has clearly testified as to how the accused brought out the executive diary and produced it before the police after P. W. 2 had opened the lock of room No. 6. He has clearly stated that the police discovered the currency notes in question bearing the same number from inside the said diary. We also do not find any reason to disbelieve the testimony of P. Ws. 1 and 6. He has clearly stated that the police discovered the currency notes in question bearing the same number from inside the said diary. We also do not find any reason to disbelieve the testimony of P. Ws. 1 and 6. ( 21 ) REGARDING the suggestion that the police had demanded Rs. 2,000. 00 from the accused and implicated him falsely for his being unable to satisfy the said demand, also remains in the realm of suggestion under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure that he is a poor man. On the face of it, it is highly improbable that the police would choose to demand such a large sum from such a person. Apart from the suggestion that the accused was arrested near the Elite Cinema is quite contrary to the evidence of P. Ws. 1, 6 and 8. ( 22 ) NOW coming to the question as to whether on the facts of this case, even if the evidence of this case is believed a conviction under section 489 (c), I. P. C is possible. We set out section 489 (c) below: Possession of forged or counterfeit currency notes or bank notes-whoever has in his possession any forged or counterfeit currency note or bank note, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be forged or counterfeit and intending to use the same as genuine or that it may be used as genuine, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years or with fine, or with both. One of the ingredients is having in possession any forged currency note or bank note. Section 463 defines as follows: Whoever makes any false document or part of a document with intent to cause damage or injury, to the public or to any person, or to support any claim or to enter into any expressed or implied contract, or with intent to commit fraud or to that fraud may be committed, commits forgery. Section 463 defines as follows: Whoever makes any false document or part of a document with intent to cause damage or injury, to the public or to any person, or to support any claim or to enter into any expressed or implied contract, or with intent to commit fraud or to that fraud may be committed, commits forgery. In this particular case it is apparent from the facts as appearing in evidence that the whole intention of the accused in representing to P. W. 3 that he could double notes was to make him part with large sum of money for the purpose of doubling, so that with that sum the accused would disappear and for this purpose he was by pretending to double the money of small amounts, winning the confidence of P. W. 3. Therefore, the intention to cause P. W. 3 to part with property with intent to commit fraud with the help of a false document, was present in the mind of the accused and this satisfied the provisions of Section 463. The fact that P. W. 3, at a glance relies that there had been tampering of the notes clearly shows that the accused himself must have known or had reason to believe the said notes to be forged while intending to use the same as genuine or that the same may be used as genuine, thereby satisfying the requirement of Section 489 (c) I. P. C. No doubt that the alteration of the digits on the said Govt. Currency Notes in question amounted to making a false document within the meaning of section 464, I. P. C. and thereby making the altered document in question a forged document. In our view the accused had in his possession forged currency notes knowing or having reason to believe the same to be forged and intending to use the same as genuine or that the same may be used as genuine. In our view the accused had in his possession forged currency notes knowing or having reason to believe the same to be forged and intending to use the same as genuine or that the same may be used as genuine. We accordingly hold on the prosecution evidence as adduced and on the material before us that the prosecution has succeeded in proving beyond all reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty of an offence punishable under section 419 (c) I. P. C. We accordingly affirm the judgment and sentence of the trial court, convicting the appellants of the offence under section 489 (c), I. P. C. and the sentence of two years R. I. The accused will of course be entitled to such set off, if any, as provided under section 428, Cr. P. C. This appeal is dismissed.