Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 40 (CAL)

Md. Mukhtar v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

2012-01-13

KANCHAN CHAKRABORTY

body2012
Judgment KANCHAN CHAKRABORTY, J. 1. THE challenge in this appeal is to the judgment dated 26.3.2010 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.2, Bichar Bhawan, Calcutta in Sessions Trial No.3 (8)/2005 thereby convicting the appellant for committing offences under Section 489B/489C of the I.P.C. and sentencing him to suffer R.I. for 7 years and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- for both the offences which would run concurrently. 2. ON 11.12.2003 at about 16.30 hours, while Satya Prakash Upadhyay, a police official attached to Amherst Street Police Station was performing round duty in the area, received an information at about 16.50 hours from the police station regarding a disturbance occurred at premises No.1, Buddha Ostagar Lane, Calcutta-9. He then and there rush to that place with Constable B. B. Chakraborty and found some people assembled there. At Premises No.1, Buddha Ostagar Lane, Calcutta, Mohan Paper House, under the proprietorship of Bijoy Mohan Das was being run. He informed that one person came to his shop to purchase 1/2 rim, i.e., 240 pcs of marble papers price of which was Rs.110/-. That man gave him two notes of 100 rupee, which he suspected to be fake. He detained the person inside the shop and informed the local people as well as the Police Station. The local people assembled there and they also found that 100 rupee notes given by him to Bijoy Mohan Das were countefeit. The Police Officer Mr. Upadhyay then entered into the shop and found the appellant Md. Mukhtar sitting inside the room with two 100 rupee notes in his left hand. Those two 100 rupee notes were bearing same serial No.4TA-988989. The man was thoroughly searched in presence of others by Mr. Upadhyay, recovered from his left side pocket of trouser, 9 pieces of 100 rupee denomination note bearing same serial No.4TA-988989. Those 11 number of fake currency notes were seized under a seizure list in presence of Binoy Mohan Das and other witnesses. Mr. Upadhyay also recorded statement of Binoy Mohan Das which he signed and on the basis of which the Amherst Street Police Station Case No.292 of 2003 dated 11.12.2003 was registered. Md. Those 11 number of fake currency notes were seized under a seizure list in presence of Binoy Mohan Das and other witnesses. Mr. Upadhyay also recorded statement of Binoy Mohan Das which he signed and on the basis of which the Amherst Street Police Station Case No.292 of 2003 dated 11.12.2003 was registered. Md. Mukhtar was taken to Police Station and on the basis of his statement, 23 pieces of fake notes of 100 rupee were recovered from the premises at 77, Noor Mahamad Munsi Lane, Howrah-1 bearing same serial number. On the basis of statement of Md. Mukhtar, Amherst Street Police official with the help of Howrah Police Official had been to the house of one Tapan Bose and recovered blank rubber stamp, 12 number of rubber stamp of different office, gram panchayet, bank and institute etc., two number of blank ration cards, 7 blank transfer certificate, two blank birth certificate, one surrender certificate of ration card and 10 number of forged court fees stamp of Rs.10/- etc. from his possession. The matter was investigated into and charge sheet was filed against the appellant Md. Mukhtar for committing offence under Section 489B/489C of I.P.C. and against Tapan Bose under Section 259/473/474 of I.P.C. 3. MD. Mukhtar, the sole appellant herein pleaded not guilty to the charge under Section 489B and 489C of the I.P.C. As a result, the trial commenced. In all, 15 witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution. The seizure list, F.I.R., report of the F.S.L., report of the India Security Press, Nashik, the statement of the appellant under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, signatures of the appellant and other papers were admitted into evidence and marked exhibits. The fake notes were also placed before the Court and marked material exhibits besides the label, cover, envelop etc. No witness was examined on behalf of the defence. Upon consideration of the evidence on record, oral and documentary, the learned Trial Court found that the prosecution able to bring home the charges against the appellant Md. The fake notes were also placed before the Court and marked material exhibits besides the label, cover, envelop etc. No witness was examined on behalf of the defence. Upon consideration of the evidence on record, oral and documentary, the learned Trial Court found that the prosecution able to bring home the charges against the appellant Md. Mukhtar and accordingly, recorded the order of conviction and sentence which is impugned in this appeal on the following grounds mainly:- a) that the learned Trial Court failed to appreciate the evidence on record in true and proper perspective; b) that the learned Trial Court failed to consider that presence of witnesses at the time of seizure was highly improbable; c) that the learned Trial Court failed to appreciate that independent witness P.Ws.12 and 13 were declared hostile and did not support the prosecution case in respect of seizure of 23 alleged fake notes bearing same serial number from the house at 77, Noor Mahamad Munsi Lane, Howrah-1; d) that the learned Trial Court was oblivious of the position of law that mere possession or using currency note does not attract the offences under Section 489B/4889C of the I.P.C. until and unless there was a mensrea or knowledge of the person possessing such a fake note that it was fake; e) that the statement made by the appellant to the police leading to the discovery of 23 pieces of fake currency notes is not admissible in evidence in view of Section 27 of the Evidence Act; f) that the judgment being otherwise bad in law, is liable to be set aside. 4. MR. Sanjoy Chakrborty, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant contended that presence of witnesses to the seizure is highly improbable. To be stated precisely, his submission is that the seizure of the 11 fake notes from the possession of said Mukhtar at No.1, Buddha Astagar Lane, Calcutta has not been established by sufficient and satisfactory evidence. He also contended that the seizure of 23 numbers of fake currency notes from 77, Noor Mahamad Munsi Lane, Howrah-1 has not also been established because independent witnesses being P.Ws12 and 13 did not support the prosecution case. That being the case, he contended, recovery of fake notes from the possession of the appellant and seizure of the same cannot be said to be established beyond doubt. 5. That being the case, he contended, recovery of fake notes from the possession of the appellant and seizure of the same cannot be said to be established beyond doubt. 5. HE contended further that the statement of an accused can only be accepted and admitted into evidence under Section 27 of the Evidence Act when it leads to discovery of fact. In the instant case, the Ext.9, i.e., the statement of Md. Mukhtar cannot be accepted and admitted as evidence under Section 27 of the Evidence Act by segregating some portion of it. The last submission of Mr. Chakraborty was that mensrea being one of the main ingredients for the offences under Section 489B/489C of the I.P.C., simple recovery of fake currency notes and effort to use the same do not constitute any offence under Section 489B and 489C of the I.P.C. 6. IN support of his contention, he refers to a decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Umashanker Vs. State of Chhattisgarh, reported in 2001 Cri. L. J. 4696. 7. MR. Soubhik Mitter, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent/State of West Bengal contended that the prosecution has not only established his case but it is a fit case where the sentence imposed is to be enhanced. The fact that the appellant had been to the shop of the defacto complainant Binoy Mohan Das at No.1, Buddha Astagar Lane, Calcutta and purchased 240 pieces of marble paper at Rs.110/- and handed over two numbers of 100 rupee notes has been established by the evidence of P.Ws.1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. This appellant was caught red handed. He was detained in the shop by those witnesses till police official arrived there, found the accused sitting inside the shop with two numbers of 100 rupee currency notes in his hands. In presence of the witnesses mentioned above, he was searched again and 9 numbers of 100 rupee currency notes were also recovered from the left pocket of his trouser. It is stated categorically that all the currency notes were bearing same numbers. 8. THE P.Ws.6 and 7, Mr. Mitter contended, witnessed that search and seizure in respect of 23 numbers of 100 rupee currency fake notes and supported the prosecution case. All the fake notes were seized and sent to the Government Security Press and each and every note was found counterfeit. 8. THE P.Ws.6 and 7, Mr. Mitter contended, witnessed that search and seizure in respect of 23 numbers of 100 rupee currency fake notes and supported the prosecution case. All the fake notes were seized and sent to the Government Security Press and each and every note was found counterfeit. The serial number of all the currency notes were same. 9. MR. Mitter contended further that the appellant used the fake notes for the purpose of purchasing of 240 numbers of marble papers price of which was Rs.110/-. He was having 9 similar fake notes inside his pocket and 23 numbers of similar notes in his house at 77, Noor Mahamad Munsi Lane at Howrah. All these facts together indicates that he was well aware of the currency notes which he tried to use and was in his possession, were fake. Therefore, when he wanted to pass the fake notes with full knowledge and possessing the fake notes with full knowledge that those were counter fakes, the offence under Section 489B and 489C of the I.P.C. are attracted. Mensrea can well be ascertained or deduced from the conduct, circumstances and facts. The decision referred to by Mr. Chakraborty is not applicable in this case. 10. MR. Mitter contended further that when the case is well established, because of reliable, cogent, consistent and trustworthy evidence, it cannot be discarded simply because two witnesses became hostile who were none but inmates of the appellant and were not supposed to go against the appellant. Mr. Mitter contended that this is a proper case where the rule for enhancement of sentence already issued should be given effect to. 11. THIS prosecution case against the appellant was started on the basis of the F.I.R. lodged by Bijan Mohan Das, sole proprietor of Mohan Paper House situated at No.1, Buddha Astagar Lane. The F.I.R. was written on spot by the I.O. himself and it was marked Ext.3/1. 12. ACCORDING to the F.I.R., this appellant came to the shop for purchasing 1 / 2 rim, i.e., 240 pieces of marble paper cost of which was Rs.110/-. He had given two currency notes of 100 rupee to Bijoy Mohan Das, who apprehended that those 100 rupee notes were fake. He then and there called on some local people and those two currency notes were shown to them. He had given two currency notes of 100 rupee to Bijoy Mohan Das, who apprehended that those 100 rupee notes were fake. He then and there called on some local people and those two currency notes were shown to them. They also apprehended that those two currency notes of 100 rupee were fake. They detained the appellant inside the shop and called on police. The P.W.10, the Police Officer attached to Jorasanko Police Station performing raid duty in the area appeared in the scene and found the appellant inside the shop, holding 100 rupee notes in his hands, besides others who gathered inside the shop. In presence of witnesses, the P.W.10, Mr. Upadhyay searched the appellant and found 9 pieces of 100 rupee currency notes in the left pocket of his trouser and all the notes were bearing same serial number 4TA-988989. Mr. Upadhyay seized 11 number of currency notes from the possession of the appellant including the two 100 rupee notes which he tried to use for the purpose of purchasing marble paper, in presence of witnesses under a seizure list and had taken the appellant to the Police Station. 13. THIS is one part of the case. The another part is that while the appellant was in police custody, he made a statement leading to discovery and on the basis of the statement leading to discovery, the police officers had been to 77, Noor Mohamad Munsi Lane, Howrah and recovered 23 numbers of 100 rupee currency notes kept inside the newspaper therefrom. Said 23 pieces of fake notes of 100 rupee were bearing same serial number and seized under seizure list in presence of some witnesses including the P.Ws.12 and 13 who were inmates of the appellant Md. Mukhtar. The story did not end there. Md. Mukhtar, the appellant also had taken the police officers to the house of one Tapan Bose and recovered blank rubber stamp, 12 number of rubber stamp of different offices, gram panchayat, bank and institution etc., two numbers of blank ration cards, 7 blank transfer certificate, two blank birth certificate, one surrender certificate of ration card and 10 numbers of forged court fees stamp of Rs.10/- from the possession of Tapan Bose. Those were also seized under a seizure list in presence of witnesses. 14. Those were also seized under a seizure list in presence of witnesses. 14. BIJOY Mohan Das, the sole proprietor of M/s. Mohan Paper House at premises No.1, Buddha Astagar Lane, Calcutta appears to be the main witness in this case. He has stated that on 11.12.2003 at about 4.30 P.M. when he was in his shop, this appellant came there and ordered him to supply half rim, i.e., 240 pieces of marble papers cost of which was Rs.110/-. For making that payment, the appellant handed over two 100 rupee notes to the P.W.3. The P.W.3 apprehended that the currency notes given by the appellant to him were counterfeit. To clear his doubt, he called on the local people who assembled there then and then and inspected those two currency notes and also expressed their apprehension that those were fake. The P.W.3 has stated also that the appellant was detained in the shop and the local Police Station was informed. Soon thereafter, the P.W.10 along with others appeared in the scene, found the gathering, examined them as well as the appellant who was found sitting inside the room holding two pieces of 100 rupee note which he had given to P.W.3 for payment of Rs.110, the cost of marble papers he purchased. The P.W.10 searched the body of the appellant inside the shop in presence of the persons gathered there and found 9 pieces of other similar type of 100 rupee currency notes in the left pocket of his trouser and all the currency notes were bearing same serial number. Those were seized under a seizure list in presence of P.W.3 and others and the police official taken the appellant and seized articles to the Police Station. The P.W.3 identified the statement made by him to the P.W.10 which was marked Ext.3 and treated as F.I.R. of the case. His signature on the seizure list in respect of 11 pieces of 100 rupee currency notes recovered from the possession of the appellant inside his shop was also proved by him. The 11 pieces of notes were shown to the P.W.3 in the Court which he identified and admitted into evidence as material Ext. XX to XX/X. The P.W.3 had to face thorough cross examination on behalf of the defence. The 11 pieces of notes were shown to the P.W.3 in the Court which he identified and admitted into evidence as material Ext. XX to XX/X. The P.W.3 had to face thorough cross examination on behalf of the defence. But his evidence could not be shakened as far as the facts related to appearing of the appellant in his shop at 4.30 P.M. on 11.12.2003, ordering of 1 /2 rim of marble papers, making payment by two 100 rupee currency notes, his apprehension regarding genuineness of the currency notes, calling on the local people and thereafter appearance of the police officer and recovery of 9 other currency notes, are concerned. These facts have been corroborated by P.W.3. 15. THE P.W.4 was a witness to the search and seizure of 11 pieces of currency notes by the police official inside the shop of the P.W.3 from the possession of the appellant. He was a signatory to the seizure list and identified his signature which was marked Ext.4/1. He also identified material Ext. XXI, i.e., the label and his signature of 11 pieces of currency notes which were seized in his presence under a seizure list. Those were also admitted into evidence and marked exhibits. Efforts were made on behalf of the defence to show that his presence in the scene was improbable. But on careful scrutiny of his cross-examination, I find that the defence failed to do so and there is nothing in the evidence of the P.W.4, which has made his presence in the scene at the relevant point of time improbable and doubtful. 16. THE P.W.5 also has corroborated the fact stated by the P.W.3 and P.W.4. He was a signatory to the seizure list and witnessed the seizure of 11 numbers of 100 rupee currency notes from the possession of the appellant inside the shop of the P.W.3 by the police officer. He identified his signatures on the seizure list as well as in the currency notes, which were produced in Court and admitted into evidence as material exhibits. The entire effort of the defence to establish that his presence in the scene at the relevant time was improbable and doubtful, in my estimate, failed miserably. 17. AS far as this part of the prosecution case is concerned, I find that the evidence of P.Ws.3, 4 and 5 is not only consistent but also credible and trustworthy. The entire effort of the defence to establish that his presence in the scene at the relevant time was improbable and doubtful, in my estimate, failed miserably. 17. AS far as this part of the prosecution case is concerned, I find that the evidence of P.Ws.3, 4 and 5 is not only consistent but also credible and trustworthy. The statements are corroborating to each other regarding facts stated by them. 18. THE learned Trial Court accepted the version of the P.Ws.3, 4 and 5 as well as the P.W.10 regarding seizure of 11 pieces of 100 rupee notes which were ultimately examined by India Security Press, Nashik and found to be counterfeit. Amongst them two notes were used by the appellant for the purpose of purchase of half rim of marble paper from the shop of P.W.3. The learned Trial Court arrived at a conclusion that all these facts together established that the appellant tried to use counterfeit currency notes and possessing of counterfeit currency notes with full knowledge and belief that he was in possession of counterfeit currency notes. 19. THE second part of the prosecution case relates to recovery of 23 numbers of 100 rupee currency notes from the residence of the appellant situated at 77, Noor Mahamad Munsi Lane, Howrah. The statement leading to discovery was admitted into evidence and marked Ext.9. That statement was made by the appellant on 11.12.2003 after his arrest from the shop of P.W.3. That part of his entire statement which was used as statement leading to discovery under Section 27 of the Evidence Act goes like this ? "if the police takes me to 77 Noor Mahamad Munsi Lane, Howrah-1, I can help the police in the recovery of 23 fake notes of 100 denomination." On the basis of the said statement dated 11.12.2003, the Amherst Police Station in consultation with the Howrah Police Station had been to the residence of the appellant at 77, Noor Mohamad Munsi Lane, Howrah-1 and at the instruction of the appellant, recovered 23 numbers of Indian currency of 100 rupee notes bearing same serial number 4TA-988989 (20 numbers) and 4TA 988289, 3KW 233020 and 8EL 565346 wrapped with one front page of Hindi Newspaper "Sanmarg' dated 21st November, Friday, 2003. It was concealed in a stag card board box inside the board cutting workshop situated beside the bed room of the accused Md. Mukhtar. It was concealed in a stag card board box inside the board cutting workshop situated beside the bed room of the accused Md. Mukhtar. The same was seized under a seizure list, which was marked Ext.5/1. The signatures of the witnesses Sarbani Khatun (P.W.13) and Shyamal Kr. Dutta (P.W.6) were taken on the seizure list (Ext.5/1) besides L.T.I. of one Afsari Khatun (P.W.12). Those seized 23 numbers of 100 rupee currency notes were sent to India Security Press at Nashik for examination and the report was received therefrom intimating that all the currency notes sent to them were counterfeit and fake. The Exts.12, 13, 14, 15 and 16 together established that fact. 20. THE case of the prosecution was supported by P.Ws.6 and 7 also who categorically stated that they had been to the 77, Noor Mahamad Munsi Lane, Howrah on basis of statement leading to discovery made by the appellant and in their presence, 23 numbers of 100 rupee currency notes were recovered from the card board cutting machine room wrapped with a daily Newspaper. They identified their signatures on the seizure list, which was marked as Ext.5, 5/1. 21. THE Hindi newspaper was produced in Court which was identified by them also. They identified the 23 pieces of 100 rupee currency notes, which was also produced in Court as material exhibits. The P.W.6 identified the label pasted on the pocket wherein the seized currency notes and the Hindi Newspaper was kept. There is no statement, whatsoever, in the cross-examination of P.Ws.6 and 7 which could make their statement regarding seizure of 23 pieces of fake 100 rupee currency notes from the house of the appellant on the basis of his statement leading to discovery, unbelievable. 22. MR. Chakraborty, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant contended that the presence of witnesses to the seizure is highly improbable because P.Ws.12 and 13, the only independent witnesses were declared hostile and did not support the prosecution case. 23. IT is true that P.Ws.12 and 13 were declared hostile by the prosecution. Amongst them, P.W.13, Sarbani Khatun admitted the fact that the appellant had been living at 77, Noor Mohamad Munsi Lane and police came to that house and requested her to stand as witness. However, police obtained her signature. The P.W.13 also admitted that same request was made to P.W.12, Afsari Khatun but she also did not agree. Amongst them, P.W.13, Sarbani Khatun admitted the fact that the appellant had been living at 77, Noor Mohamad Munsi Lane and police came to that house and requested her to stand as witness. However, police obtained her signature. The P.W.13 also admitted that same request was made to P.W.12, Afsari Khatun but she also did not agree. The P.W.12 Afsari Khatun denied the entire fact. The fact that the appellant had been living at 77 Noor Mohamad Munsi Lane, Howrah is an admitted position supported by P.W.13. The fact that police had been to that house and asked them to stand as witnesses is also cannot be denied. They did not agree to do so. This does not necessarily indicate that there was no seizure of 23 pieces of 100 rupee currency notes from the premises at 77, Noor Mohamad Munsi Lane, Howrah which was under possession of the appellant. This part of the prosecution case was fully supported by P.Ws.6 and 7 who were police officers. According to Mr. Chakraborty, their evidence cannot be accepted because they are interested witnesses. 24. THIS Court is unable to accept that proposition of Mr. Chakraborty. The P.Ws.6 and 7 witnessed the entire incident and their evidence is direct evidence. Simply because, they belonged to Police Department, their evidence cannot be thrown away. There exists no rule of law that the evidence of the police officials should be treated as evidence of interested witnesses. The P.Ws.6 and 7 had no interest, whatsoever, in making a false statement against the appellant. The fact that the appellant took the police party to the premises at No.77, Noor Mohamad Munsi Lane, Howrah and on the basis of the statement leading to discovery, 23 pieces of 100 rupee currency notes were recovered from his room has been established beyond all doubts despite the fact that P.Ws.12 and 13 declined to stand as witnesses to the seizure. The evidence of P.Ws.6, 7 and to some extent P.Ws.13 besides the seizure list itself and material exhibits produced in Court made the prosecution case acceptable. Therefore, I find no wrong or illegality in the findings of the learned Trial Court in this regard. The evidence of P.Ws.6, 7 and to some extent P.Ws.13 besides the seizure list itself and material exhibits produced in Court made the prosecution case acceptable. Therefore, I find no wrong or illegality in the findings of the learned Trial Court in this regard. The evidence of P.Ws.3, 4 and 5 besides the seizure list and evidence of P.Ws.6, 7 and 13 besides the seizure list have established the prosecution case that on the particular date and time, this appellant had been to the shop of the P.W.3, purchased half rim of marble paper, cost of which was Rs.110/- and that he handed over two numbers of 100 rupee fake currency notes to the P.W.3, genuinity of which was doubted and that local people gathered there and afterwards 9 other 100 rupee currency notes were recovered from his possession in presence of the P.Ws.3, 4 and 5 by the P.W.10 and that on the basis of Ext.9, i.e., the statement leading to discovery, the police official had been to 77, Noor Mohamad Munsi Lane, Howrah and recovered 23 numbers of fake 100 rupee currency notes in presence of P.Ws.6, 7, 12 and 13 and together with the report of the India Security Press. The evidence recorded by the learned Trial Court, in my estimate was properly and correctly appreciated. There is no inconsistency in the evidence led by the prosecution witnesses, which could have created doubt in the prosecution case regarding efforts of the appellant to use fake currency notes and possessing of the fake currency notes. 25. MR. Chakraborty, learned Counsel for the appellant contended that buying or receiving from another persons or otherwise trafficking in or using as genuine or also possessing or even intending to use any forged or counterfeit currency notes or bank notes is not sufficient to make out a case under Section 489B/489C of the I.P.C. In order to attract the sections, mensrea of offence, i.e., "knowing or having reason to believe that currency notes or bank notes or forged or counterfeit" must be established. Mr. Chakraborty in support of his contention referred to a decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case 4696. 26. IT is settled principle of law that mere possession of any forged or counterfeit currency notes or bank note is not an offence. Mr. Chakraborty in support of his contention referred to a decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case 4696. 26. IT is settled principle of law that mere possession of any forged or counterfeit currency notes or bank note is not an offence. It is necessary further to establish that the accused possessing such bank note or currency note, had knowledge or had reason to believe the same to be forged or counterfeit. 27. THIS is the position of law and there cannot be any debate on that point. Now the question is how the knowledge of a person can be ascertained? Inference of knowledge or reason to believe that the notes are counterfeit or forged has to be drawn from the facts and circumstances of the case, conduct of the accused at the time of committing the offence and other facts indicating that he had such knowledge. Since knowledge or reason to believe is a mental affair, it can only be inferred from the facts and circumstances of the case. 28. IN the instant case, the appellant for the first time initially tried to pass two currency notes of 100 rupee denomination in the shop of the P.W.3. He was possessing 9 same types of currency notes bearing same serial number at that relevant point of time. He did not disclose that he was possessing 9 other such currency notes inside the pocket of his trouser when he was detained by the P.W.3 and others and to the police officer till he was searched. Thereafter, he made statement leading to discovery and on the basis of the said statement leading to discovery (Ext.9), 23 numbers of similar type of currency notes, mostly bearing same serial number, were recovered which was kept hideously in the room under the possession of the appellant. Those 23 numbers of 100 rupee notes were wrapped with newspaper and kept inside a card board box. Had the appellant no knowledge or believe that the currency notes were forged or counterfeit, he would not have kept those hideously in the room wherefrom it was recovered. The facts and circumstances of the case altogether indicates that the appellant had the knowledge or reason to believe that notes he wanted to pass in the shop of the P.W.3, found inside the pocket of his trouser and in the room at Howrah were counterfeit or forged. The facts and circumstances of the case altogether indicates that the appellant had the knowledge or reason to believe that notes he wanted to pass in the shop of the P.W.3, found inside the pocket of his trouser and in the room at Howrah were counterfeit or forged. Therefore, taking the facts and circumstances of the case together it can well be said that the offences under Section 489B/489C of the I.P.C. have been attracted in the instant case and the learned Trial Court made no mistake in recording conviction of the appellant. 29. IN view of the discussions above, this Court finds that there is no reason to upset the judgment of conviction and sentence which has been impugned in this appeal. It is affirmed. The appeal fails. The learned Trial Court is directed to take immediate action to give effect to the sentence imposed by it. 30. AS regards rule issued by this Court for increasing the period of sentence, this Court is of the opinion that the alleged incident had taken place about 9 years ago and in the passage of time, everything has been changed. This man might have understood the seriousness of the crime he has committed. The learned Trial Court has taken into consideration that the appellant has no one besides his elder sister and the daughters and son of elder sister and ailing elder brother. All of them were dependent on him. 31. THEREFORE, this Court discharge the rule issued by this Court. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the appearing parties upon compliance of necessary formalities.