Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 242 (PNJ)

Israr v. State of Haryana

2013-02-21

MAHESH GROVER

body2013
JUDGMENT Mr. Mahesh Grover, J.: (Oral) - The appellant impugned the judgment dated 10/12.8.2010 rendered by the Additional Sessions Judge, (Fast Track Court), Panipat convicting him under the provisions of Section 489-B and 489-C of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him as under:- Under Section 489B IPC To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of Seven years and to pay a fine in the sum of Rs. 2,000/-. In default of payment of fine the accused shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for Two months Under Section 489C IPC To undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of Three years and to pay a fine in the sum of Rs. 1,000/-. In default of payment of fine the accused shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for One month. 2. Case against the appellant was registered on the basis of secret information received and when confronted by the police, the appellant was found to be in possession of 17,500/- counterfeit currency notes, i.e., 10 currency notes of denomination of Rs. 1000/- each and 75 currency notes of denomination of Rs. 100/- each which were wrapped in a polythene. These were sealed in a parcel with a seal “ss” after preparing the recovery memo. and on completion of investigation, final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was submitted to the court for trial of the appellant. 3. The appellant was charged for having violated the provisions of Section 489-B and 489-C of IPC to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial, which resulted in the conviction and the sentence being awarded to him, the details of which have been given in the foregoing paragraph. 4. Assailing the aforesaid conviction and sentence, learned counsel for the appellant contends that no case under Section 489-B of IPC stands established against the appellant even if the entire case of the prosecution is taken to be correct. The contention is that at best a case under Section 489-C IPC stands established against him, keeping in view the fact that he was found in possession of the counterfeit currency notes. He further contends that appellant has already undergone 4 years and 4 months out of the total substantial sentence of 7 years awarded to him. The contention is that at best a case under Section 489-C IPC stands established against him, keeping in view the fact that he was found in possession of the counterfeit currency notes. He further contends that appellant has already undergone 4 years and 4 months out of the total substantial sentence of 7 years awarded to him. If the conviction is to be maintained under Section 489-C of IPC, the sentence awarded would naturally be reduced appropriately and for the offence he has been awarded three years imprisonment only as against the four years which he has already undergone. 5. The prayer has been opposed by learned counsel for the State who has contended that the appellant was found to be in possession of counterfeit currency without there being any explanation regarding its possession. Therefore, keeping in view the said fact and fact that the currency was found to be counterfeit which has been duly established by the report of Forensic Science Laboratory, there is no escape from the conclusion that the appellant has violated the aforesaid provisions of law and therefore, the conviction and sentence awarded does not warrant any interference. 6. I have considered the arguments raised before this Court. 7. The appellant has merely pleaded false implication in the wake of the allegations as set out against him. In the case set up by the prosecution when the appellant was found to be in possession of counterfeit currency notes, the onus would instantly shift to him and he would be under an obligation to explain as to how he was in possession of the same. If he fails to explain the possession satisfactorily, then an inference regarding his knowledge and intent to use the counterfeit currency as genuine could be safely presumed against him. 8. If the facts of the case are to be seen then the appellant cannot escape the consequences under the provisions of Section 489 C of IPC as he was found to be in possession of counterfeit currency, sans any explanation and thus would invite an adverse inference against himself. To a specific question under Section 313 Cr.P.C. to this effect, he offered no explanation whatsoever. The conviction of the appellant under Section 489-C of IPC, is totally justified, more particularly, when the appellant fails to show any animus of the police towards him, which would justify his plea of false implication. 9. To a specific question under Section 313 Cr.P.C. to this effect, he offered no explanation whatsoever. The conviction of the appellant under Section 489-C of IPC, is totally justified, more particularly, when the appellant fails to show any animus of the police towards him, which would justify his plea of false implication. 9. In so far as the question under Section 489-B of IPC is concerned, the prosecution has failed to establish the ingredients thereof as this provision of law talks of a person in possession of counterfeit currency intending to sell or buy or receive from any other person or otherwise trafficks in or uses as genuine any forged or counterfeit currency note showing or having reason to believe the same to be forged or counterfeit. 10. Even though there is a slight hint of indulging in trafficking of counterfeit currency by the appellant along with his co-accused, yet the prosecution failed to establish this aspect of the matter. His co-accused was never traced and no evidence in this regard is available on record. 11. Having said so on the aforesaid aspects of the matter, the sentence of 7 years under Section 489-B awarded to the appellant is unsustainable and is set aside and the appellant is absolved of this charge against him. 12. The appellant is now left to face the consequence of sentence under Section 489 C of IPC which is of 3 years. Since the appellant has already undergone 4 years and 4 months out of the total sentence, which is more than the period awarded to him under Section 489-C of IPC and in the absence of any counter appeal by the State, I am of the opinion that the appeal deserves to be disposed of with the direction that the appellant be set free at once, if not required in any other case as he has already undergone the period of 4 years and 4 months(as is clear from the custody certificate placed on record by the learned State counsel) which is already in excess to the period of sentence of 3 years awarded to him, keeping in view the aforesaid reasons.