Ashok Baburao Shinde vs State Of Maharashtra
2004 Latest Caselaw 1013 Bom

JUDGMENT

A.S. Bagga, J.

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and Order dated 24-6-1991 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Buldana in Sessions Trial No. 27 of 1991 whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the appellant for the offence punishable Under Section 489B of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fine of Rs. 500/-, in default, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one year.

2. It is alleged that on 17-11-1990 at about 10.15 am the appellant went to the Petrol Pump of the complainant and sought to purchase 5 litres of petrol. He tendered currency note in the denomination of rupees hundred. The said currency note was bearing no number and it was, therefore, closely examined by the complainant with the help of one Shri Bhalerao, Naib Tahsildar who was present at the Petrol Pump for official purpose. It was found that the currency note in question had no number at the corners and that pieces of currency notes had been joined together and pasted. The appellant was questioned about the source of the currency note in question. He disclosed that the said currency note was given to him by his employer, Karim Bhangarwala to purchase 5 litres of petrol. Complaint was registered; accused/appellant was arrested and eventually he came to be tried for the offence punishable Under Section 489B of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The learned Additional Sessions Judge tried the appellant who had pleaded not guilty. During trial, evidence of the complainant was recorded along with the evidence of Investigating Officer and other witnesses. The currency note in question and its photographs were placed on record. Relying on the evidence both oral and documentary, and the report of the Technical Officer of Bank Note Press, Devas, the learned Trial Judge held that the currency note in the denomination of rupees hundred tendered by the appellant was forged and counterfeit and on conviction, sentenced him for the offence punishable Under Section 489B of Indian Penal Code, as aforesaid.

4. None appears for appellant. However, with the assistance of Mr. A. S. Fulzele, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, I have gone through the judgment impugned and the evidence recorded during the trial.

5. Statement of the accused/appellant was recorded under section 313, Criminal Procedure Code whereunder in answer to question No. 31 he has stated that it was Karim Bhangarwala, his employer, who had given him the currency note in question to purchase 5 litres of petrol as at that time there was shortage of petrol. Photographs of the currency note were placed on record as Articles 'A' and 'B'. There is report from the Bank Note press, Devas which discloses that the aforesaid currency note was counterfeit note. From the oral evidence and seizure memo, it is adequately established on record that it was the very currency note which was offered by the accused/appellant for purchase of petrol and which was subsequently seized. There is, therefore, no difficulty to hold that the currency note which was in possession of the appellant was counterfeit note.

6. In the fact situation of this case, the question is, whether mere holding of the counterfeit note in total ignorance of the fact that it is forged one or counterfeit, can bring home the guilt of the accused. The provisions of section 489B of the Penal Code are self-explanatory inasmuch as it is provided thereunder that whoever sells to, or buys or receives from any other person or otherwise traffics in or uses as genuine any forged or counterfeit currency-note or bank-note, knowing or having reason to believe the same to be forged or counterfeit, shall be liable for punishment. During his statement recorded Under Section 313, Criminal Procedure Code, the accused/appellant in answer to question No. 29 to the effect that he had paid currency note of Rs. 100/- knowing the same to be forged, stated that he was not knowing that the note in question was forged.

7. It is a settled position of law that Under Section 489B of the Indian Penal Code, the burden is on the prosecution to prove that at the time when the accused was passing the note he knew that it was a forged one. The mere possession of it by him does not shift the burden to the accused to prove his innocent possession of the forged note. It is required to be proved that the accused intended to use the forged or counterfeit currency note as genuine or it might be used as genuine.

8. In the present case even though it is proved that the currency note which the accused/appellant had tendered was forged or counterfeit, the prosecution has failed to establish that the accused/appellant had knowledge or had reason to believe the same to be forged or counterfeit. It is not the prosecution allegation that the appellant was also found in possession of additional currency notes. It is important to note that the appellant/accused in this case is an illiterate person and was a petty employee. Even if it has been shown that the currency note in question did not bear any number, this by itself would not be sufficient to hold that the accused/appellant had reasons to believe that the note was forged, fake or counterfeit or that he had knowledge that it was not genuine, in my considered opinion, therefore, the impugned order of conviction and sentence, deserves to be quashed and set aside?

9. In the result, the impugned judgment and Order of conviction and sentence is quashed and set aside. Appellant stands acquitted of the offence punishable Under Section 489B of the Indian Penal Code with which he was charged. Bail bonds of the accused/appellant stand cancelled. Amount of fine, if deposited be refunded to the accused/appellant.