JUDGMENT 1. - Heard the learned PP for the State. From from the perusal of the impugned order dated 22.8.97, it is apparent that 16 currency notes of 500 denomination each were recovered from the possession of the accused by the concerned Investigating Officer. After seizure of the said currency, the matter was entrusted to Shri Sajjan Singh, CID (CB) by the Supdt. of Police. In order to confirm as to whether the seized currency was forged or not, the same was sent to the Bank Note Press, Devas (MP), from where expert opinion was obtained vide Ex.R 9. Thereafter challan was filed before the competent trial court for proceeding against the accused for the offence under section 489-B and 489-C IPC. The trial court has clearly opined that the person from whom expert opinion was received vide Ex.R 9 had failed to specify the number of the currency notes, which were sent for examination. It was the duty of the expert to have mentioned numbers of the seized currency notes clearly. In absence of the same it cannot be inferred as to whether the seized currency notes were forged. The prosecution has further failed to lead evidence of connecting in accused with the seized currency inasmuch as to how and in what way the accused had derived benefit by utilising that currency in exchange for the goods purchased from the dealer in the market? 2. As a result of the above discussion, I am of the view that the impugned order of the trial court recording the finding of acquittal in favour of the accused for the offence under section 489-B & 489-C IPC does not call for any interference. Leave to appeal to the State is accordingly declined.Leave to Appeal Refused. *******