JUDGMENT : Rajiv Sharma, J. This appeal is instituted against the judgment dated 23.11.2006, rendered by the learned Sessions Judge, Kangra at Dharamshala, H.P., in Sessions Trial No. 36 of 2006, Sessions Case No. 21-G/VII-2005, whereby the appellant-accused (hereinafter referred to as the accused), who was charged with and tried for offences punishable under Sections 489-B & 489-C IPC read with Section 34 IPC was convicted and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/- under Section 489-B read with Section 34 IPC and further to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- under Section 489-C read with Section 34 IPC. In default of payment of fine, the accused was ordered to undergo further simple imprisonment for a period of two months each on both counts. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 2. The case of the prosecution, in a nut shell, is that PW-1 Kishori Lal made statement under Section 154 Cr.P.C. vide Ext. PW-1/A to the effect that on 10.9.2004 at 1:30 PM, two boys aged about 20-25 years came to his shop. They purchased three handkerchiefs from him and handed over a currency note of the denomination of Rs. 500/- to him. He deducted Rs. 30, the price of three handkerchiefs and returned Rs. 470/- as balance to them. Thereafter, they went away on their scooter No. PB-07B-1995. Later on, when he checked the currency note, it appeared to be fake. He also got the currency note checked from the local Bank. It was reported to be fake. At about 2/2:05 PM, he informed the Police Post, Chintpurni. Thereafter, he went in search of the accused persons in his maruti car. HC Balbir Singh etc. also accompanied him in maruti car and went towards Gagret in search of those boys. When they reached near Police barrier at Gagret at about 3:00 PM, both the boys were going on scooter No. PB-07B-1995 towards Hoshiarpur. The police personnel disclosed their identity. Later on, the informant came to know that both the accused had also given one currency note of Rs. 500/- to Sanjeev Sharma, another shopkeeper of Chintpurni. He along with Sanjeev Sharma produced both the currency notes to the police. Ext. P-1 and P-2, currency notes were sealed and taken into possession vide memo Ext. Later on, the informant came to know that both the accused had also given one currency note of Rs. 500/- to Sanjeev Sharma, another shopkeeper of Chintpurni. He along with Sanjeev Sharma produced both the currency notes to the police. Ext. P-1 and P-2, currency notes were sealed and taken into possession vide memo Ext. PW-1/B in the presence of Kewal Krishan and Sanjeev Sharma. FIR Ext. PW-6/A was registered. The personal search of accused Neeraj Sharma was also carried out. Three currency notes of denomination of Rs. 500/- each Ext. P-3 to P-5, were recovered from back side pocket of his jeans pants. These were sealed in a parcel and taken into possession in the presence of witnesses by the police. The currency notes were deposited with MHC Onkar Chand. The same were sent on 4.10.2004 to FSL, Junga through PW-8 Const. Gurjit Singh. Report of the FSL Ext. PW-9/A was obtained to the effect that the currency notes were not genuine but counterfeit. The investigation was completed and the challan was put up before the Court after completing all the codal formalities. 3. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, has examined as many as eleven witnesses. The accused was also examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. He pleaded innocence. The learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused, as noticed hereinabove. Hence, this appeal. 4. Mr. Sanjay Dutt Vasudeva, Advocate, has vehemently argued that the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused. On the other hand, Mr. Neeraj K. Sharma, Dy. Advocate General has supported the judgment of the learned trial Court dated 23.11.2006. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for both the sides and have also gone through the judgment and records of the case carefully. 6. PW-1 Kishori Lal testified that on 10.9.2004 at about 12:30/1:00 PM two boys came to his shop. They were in the age group of 30-32 years. One of the accused, namely, Gurdeep Kumar asked for purchase of three handkerchiefs. They had come to his shop on scooter No. PB-07B-1995. They gave him Rs. 500/- currency note, out of which, he charged Rs. 30/- and returned Rs. 470/- to them. After he handled the currency note of Rs. 500/- given to him by the accused persons, he suspected that it might not be a genuine currency note. They had come to his shop on scooter No. PB-07B-1995. They gave him Rs. 500/- currency note, out of which, he charged Rs. 30/- and returned Rs. 470/- to them. After he handled the currency note of Rs. 500/- given to him by the accused persons, he suspected that it might not be a genuine currency note. Thereafter, he went to Kangra Co-operative Bank, Chintpurni, adjacent to his shop and showed the note to one Mr. Rana, an employee of the Bank. Mr. Rana told him that the note was fake. Then, he telephonically informed Police Post, Chintpurni and proceeded to the Police Post. His statement under Section 154 Cr.P.C. was recorded by the police, from where police officials accompanied him in search of the accused persons towards Hoshiarpur. The accused persons were apprehended. In the meantime, one more shopkeeper Sanjeev Sharma also came to the Police Post, Chintpurni as the accused had handed over some fake currency to him also. He also identified the accused persons there. He handed over the currency note of Rs. 500/- vide memo Ext. PW-1/B. Sh. Sanjeev Sharma also handed over another currency note of Rs. 500/- denomination to the police. Three other currency notes of denomination of Rs. 500/- were also taken into possession vide memo Ext. PW-1/C by the police. In his crossexamination by the learned defence counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, he denied the suggestion that at that time, only servant was present in the shop. He denied that currency note Ext. P-1 was handed over to him by his servant. He did not know the accused persons personally at that time. He denied the suggestion that neither the accused persons have purchased anything from him nor currency note Ext. P-1 was handed over to him by them. He admitted that Chintpurni bazaar is a busy place. In his cross-examination by the learned defence counsel appearing on behalf of accused Gurdeep, he denied the suggestion that nothing was recovered from accused Gurdeep Kumar. 7. PW-2 Sandeep Rana stated that he was working as Clerk in Kangra Co-operative Bank, Chintpurni. He was dealing with cash. He deposed that PW-1 Kishori Lal came to his seat and showed him currency note Ext. P-1, which was found to be fake. 8. PW-3 Sanjeev Sharma testified that he was running gift shop at Chintpurni bazaar. 7. PW-2 Sandeep Rana stated that he was working as Clerk in Kangra Co-operative Bank, Chintpurni. He was dealing with cash. He deposed that PW-1 Kishori Lal came to his seat and showed him currency note Ext. P-1, which was found to be fake. 8. PW-3 Sanjeev Sharma testified that he was running gift shop at Chintpurni bazaar. On 10.9.2004, he was in his house attending some function. His servant Surjeet Kumar was in his shop. In the evening there was a talk in the town that persons having fake currency notes have been arrested by the police. So, he went to the Police Post, Chintpurni as he was Up-Pardhan of Gram Panchayat. At about 3-3:30 PM, he came to his shop and found one fake currency note of Rs. 500/- in his sale. He handed over the currency note to police vide memo Ext. PW-1/B. He could not identify the accused persons from whom currency notes Ext. P- 3 to P-5 were recovered by the police as the occurrence was old one. In his cross-examination, he deposed that he has not gone through the contents of Ext. PW-1/B and PW-1/C when he signed the same. He was declared hostile and cross-examined by the learned Public Prosecutor. In his re-examination, he admitted that the police has taken into possession fake currency notes handed over to him and Kishori Lal. He admitted that three notes were recovered from accused Neeraj which were sealed in his presence. 9. PW-4 Kewal Krishan deposed that PW-1 Kishori Lal and Sanjeev Kumar had handed over Ext. P-1 and P-2 to the police. He identified signatures on Ext. PW-1/B. 10. PW-5 HC Balbir Singh deposed that he received telephonic message from Kishori Lal, shopkeeper informing that two boys had come to his shop on scooter and purchased three handkerchiefs for Rs. 30/-. The accused paid him a note of Rs. 500/-, which according to him appeared to be fake. This information was reduced in daily diary vide Ext. PW-5/A. They proceeded in the vehicle towards Hoshiarpur. When they reached just little ahead from Gagret barrier, they noticed accused riding the scooter. They were identified by PW-1 Kishori Lal and intercepted. 11. PW-7 HC Onkar Chand deposed that on 10.9.2004 SI Om Parkash handed over to him two parcels duly sealed with seals “H” and “C” along with specimen seal and other articles of jamatalashi. When they reached just little ahead from Gagret barrier, they noticed accused riding the scooter. They were identified by PW-1 Kishori Lal and intercepted. 11. PW-7 HC Onkar Chand deposed that on 10.9.2004 SI Om Parkash handed over to him two parcels duly sealed with seals “H” and “C” along with specimen seal and other articles of jamatalashi. He entered the same in the malkhana register. On 4.10.2004, he sent these articles to FSL Junga through HHC Gurjeet Singh vide RC No. 108/21. 12. PW-8 Const. Gurjeet Singh has taken the case property on 4.10.2004 to FSL, Junga. 13. PW-9 Dr. Meenakshi Mahajan has proved report Ext. PW- 9/A. According to her, these currency notes were processed in the laboratory by her to find out their genuineness. In her opinion, these were fake currency notes. 14. PW-10 Surjit Kumar deposed that in the month of September, 2004, he was working in the shop of PW-3 Sanjeev Sharma at Chintpurni. PW-3 Sanjeev Sharma was away to his house in connection with some work and he was attending to the shop. At about 1:30 PM, two boys came to his shop and purchased one garland and ear rings. They handed over to him a currency note of Rs. 500/- and he returned the balance amount of Rs. 450/- to them. He produced the sale proceeds before PW-3 Sanjeev Sharma at about 4:00 PM. In his cross-examination, he admitted that the accused persons were shown to him outside the Court so he identified them. 15. PW-11 SI Om Parkash, deposed that on 10.9.2004, he was on patrolling duty along with other police officials from Dehra to Chintpurni. When he reached near Bharwain, HC Balbir Singh of PP Chintpurni along with PW-1 Kishori Lal and accused persons met him. They went to Police Post, Chintpurni, where report Ext. PW-1/A was lodged. Kishori Lal and Sanjeev Sharma handed over one fake currency note of five hundred each which were taken into possession by the police. He conducted personal search of the accused. Three fake/forged currency notes of Rs. 500/- were recovered from the pocket of accused Neeraj Kumar. The same were also sealed. 16. What emerges from the analysis of the statements of the witnesses is that the accused persons had visited Chintpurni on 10.9.2004. He conducted personal search of the accused. Three fake/forged currency notes of Rs. 500/- were recovered from the pocket of accused Neeraj Kumar. The same were also sealed. 16. What emerges from the analysis of the statements of the witnesses is that the accused persons had visited Chintpurni on 10.9.2004. They had purchased three handkerchiefs from the shop of PW-1 Kishori Lal and handed over to him one fake currency note of Rs. 500/-. PW-1 Kishori Lal got currency note verified from PW-2 Sandeep Rana. It was found to be fake. Thereafter, the police was informed and accused were apprehended. PW-3 Sanjeev Sharma also came to know that accused had handed over fake currency note to his servant in the shop. Currency notes, Ext. P-1 and P-2 were taken into possession by the police. The currency notes subsequently recovered from the search of the accused Neeraj were also taken into possession vide Ext. P-3 to P-5. The case property was deposited in the malkhana. The currency notes were sent to FSL, Junga through PW-8 Const. Gurjit Singh. PW-9 Dr. Meenakshi Mahajan found the currency notes to be fake. She duly proved her report Ext. PW-9/A. 17. Mr. Sanjay Dutt Vasudeva, Advocate, for the accused has vehemently argued that the accused have not been identified, however, the fact of the matter is that the accused were identified by PW-1 Kishori Lal, PW-3 Sanjeev Sharma as well as PW-10 Surjit Kumar. The accused were apprehended when they were trying to escape towards Hoshiarpur by the police. 18. The currency notes which were handed over to PW-1 Kishori Lal and PW-3 Sanjeev Sharma were bearing No. 5 CC 96125 and 5 CC 96126. The currency notes which were subsequently recovered from the personal search of accused Neeraj Kumar were bearing Nos. 961130, 961131 and 352923. PW-1 Kishori Lal has categorically stated that the accused had visited his shop and purchased the articles by handing over to him fake currency note. Similarly, PW-10 Surjit Kumar has also deposed that accused had visited the shop of PW-3 Sanjeev Sharma and handed over fake currency note. PW-3 Sanjeev Sharma has also deposed that he found one currency note fake in the sale proceeds which was handed over to him by PW-10 Surjit Kumar. Similarly, PW-10 Surjit Kumar has also deposed that accused had visited the shop of PW-3 Sanjeev Sharma and handed over fake currency note. PW-3 Sanjeev Sharma has also deposed that he found one currency note fake in the sale proceeds which was handed over to him by PW-10 Surjit Kumar. PW-3 Sanjeev Sharma, though was declared hostile, but in his re-examination, he admitted that the police took into possession fake currency notes handed over to him and Kishori Lal. He also admitted that three notes were recovered from accused Neeraj which were sealed in his presence. 19. The statements of PW-1 Kishori Lal and PW-3 Sanjeev Sharma have been duly corroborated by the Investigating Officer, PW-5 HC Balbir Singh as well as PW-10 Surjit Kumar and PW-11 SI Om Parkash. The accused were in possession of fake currency notes knowing them to be fake. 20. The decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court cited by Mr. Sanjay Dutt Vasudeva, Advocate, in the case of Raghubir Singh vs. State of Delhi, reported in 2013 Cri. L.J. 3032, is not applicable in the present facts and circumstances of the case, more particularly when the accused were found in possession of five fake currency notes and they have not given any explanation how they came into the possession of the same. 21. The accused had the knowledge or reason to believe about the currency notes being forged at the time when it was passed over to the shop keepers. The accused had the intention to use the forged notes as genuine. 22. The learned Single Judge of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Re, Satyanarayana, reported in AIR 1961 AP 213 , has held that in a prosecution under S. 489-C IPC, the ingredients of the offence viz., that the accused knew or had reason to believe the currency notes to be counterfeit and his intention to use the same as genuine or that it might be used as genuine, should be proved by the prosecution. It is however not necessary that such proof should be by direct evidence. It has been held as follows: “12. It is however not necessary that such proof should be by direct evidence. It has been held as follows: “12. It is clear from the above decisions that the ingredients under Section 489-C I. P, C. namely that the accused knew or had reason to believe the currency notes to be counterfeit and his intention to use the same as genuine or that it might be used as genuine, should be proved by the prosecution but that such proof need not be necessary by direct evidence, such as the evidence of P. Ws. 2 and 3 in the present case.” 23. Their lordships of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ponnuswamy vs. State, reported in 1995 Cri. L.J. 2658, have held that the appellant had no explanation to offer as to wherefrom he had obtained those forged currency notes. Silence on the part of the appellant in such circumstances would by itself be a telling circumstance which would weigh against him. It has been held as follows: “The verdict of the three Courts below is similar in convicting and keeping maintained the convictions of the appellant under Sections 489-B and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. The case of the prosecution against the appellant is that he had purchased paddy from a peasant on payment of 130 forged currency notes of Rs. 100/- denomination. On the arrest of the appellant, further forged currency notes were alleged to have been found in his possession for which he had to face a trial separately. All the same, the appellant had no explanation to offer as to wherefrom had he obtained those forged currency notes. Silence on the part of the appellant in such circumstances would by itself be a telling consideration of the prosecution evidence led against him. In these circumstances, we are of the view that the convictions recorded deserve no alteration and equally there is no scope for reduction of sentence. Maintaining the convictions and sentences of the appellant, we dismiss this appeal.” 24. The learned Single Judge of the Kerala High Court in the case of Vijayan alias Kochomon vs. State of Kerala, reported in 2002 Cri. L.J. 187, has held that when the accused had the full knowledge that notes possessed by him and offered to prosecution witness were counterfeit, he was thus liable to be convicted for offence under Section 489-C IPC. L.J. 187, has held that when the accused had the full knowledge that notes possessed by him and offered to prosecution witness were counterfeit, he was thus liable to be convicted for offence under Section 489-C IPC. It has been held as follows: “11. PW-3 stated before Court that when the currencies were taken out and shown to him even at the first blush, he was convinced that they were counterfeit notes because there was difference in colour. Thus, the accused also had every reason to know that the currency notes possessed by him and offered to PW-3 were counterfeit currencies.” 25. Their lordships of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of K. Hasim vs. State of Tamil Nadu, reported in 2005 Cri. L.J. 143, have held that Section 489 B relates to using as genuine forged or counterfeited currency notes or bank notes. The object of Legislature in enacting this section is to stop the circulation of forged notes by punishing all persons who knowing or having reason to believe the same to be forged do any act which could lead to their circulation. Their lordships have further held that possession and knowledge that currency notes were counterfeited notes are necessary. It has been held as follows: “42. Similarly Section 489 B relates to using as genuine forged or counterfeited currency notes or bank notes. The object of Legislature in enacting this section is to stop the circulation of forged notes by punishing all persons who knowing or having reason to believe the same to be forged do any act which could lead to their circulation. 43. Section 489C deals with possession of forged or counterfeit currency notes or bank notes. It makes possession of forged and counterfeited currency notes or bank notes punishable. Possession and knowledge that the currency notes were counterfeited notes are necessary ingredients to constitute offence under Section 489 C and 489 D. As was observed by this Court in State of Kerala v. Mathai Verghese and Ors. ( AIR 1987 SC 33 ) the expression 'currency notes' is large and wide enough in its amplitude to cover the currency notes of any country. Section 489C is not restricted to Indian currency note alone but it includes dollar also and it applies to American dollar bills.” 26. Accordingly, there is no merit in this appeal, the same is dismissed. Bail bonds are canelled.