Bombay High Court
Suresh Deorao Mhaske vs State Of Mah on 3 January, 2025
2025:BHC-AUG:46
-1- Cri Appeal No. 201.2005
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 201 OF 2005
Suresh S/o. Deorao Mhaske,
Age : 32 Years, Occu. : Labourer,
R/o. Bhimnagar, Bhavsingpura,
Aurangabad. ..... Appellant
(Ori. Accused No.1)
Versus
The State of Maharashtra ..... Respondent
.....
Advocate for Appellant : Mr. Prashant Shinde h/f Mr. S.G. Shinde.
APP for Respondent-State : Mr. D.R. Korade
.....
CORAM : ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.
RESERVED ON : 13 December, 2024
PRONOUNCED ON : 03 January, 2025
JUDGMENT :
1. Instant appeal arises out of judgment and order dated
18.03.2005, passed by learned Ist Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge,
Aurangabad, in Sessions Case No.20/2005, recording guilt of the
present appellant for offence punishable under Section 489-C of the
Indian Penal Code (hereinafter shortly referred to as "IPC").
-2- Cri Appeal No. 201.2005
IN NUTSHELL, CASE OF THE PROSECUTION IS AS UNDER :
2. Police Station Kranti Chowk, Aurangabad charge-sheeted
the present appellant alleging that, secret information was received
that the appellant is in possession of counterfeit and fake currency
notes and he is about to circulate said notes in the market. On receipt
of said information, PW2 Police Inspector, P.S. Kranti Chowk i.e.
Informant, planned and arranged trap on 04.07.2004, near Samta
Nagar Chowk, Aurangabad. PW2 Informant caught the appellant and
in his body search, he was found to be in possession of 19 currency
notes of Rs.100/- each, in his pant pocket. Same were seized vide
panchnama and thereafter, PW2 Informant lodged the report and on
the basis of which, Crime No.182/2004 was registered against the
appellant. He himself carried out investigation and after gathering
evidence, he charge-sheeted the appellant.
3. The appellant was tried by 1 st Ad-hoc Additional Sessions
Judge, Aurangabad vide Sessions Case No.20/2005, for offences
punishable under Sections 489-A, 489-C & 489-D of the IPC. On
complete appreciation and analysis of the evidence, learned trial
Judge by his judgment and order dated 18.03.2005, held the
appellant guilty, but only for offence punishable under Section 489-C
of the IPC and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for five years
and to pay fine.
-3- Cri Appeal No. 201.2005
4. It is the above judgment which is now taken exception to
by filing instant appeal.
SUBMISSIONS
ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT :
5. Learned counsel for the appellant would point out that,
there is false implication. He questioned the very story of prosecution
on several grounds mentioned in the appeal memo. Learned counsel
would further point out that, PW2 informant/police officer claims
about receipt of secret information and thereafter, laying of trap and
apprehended the appellant. According to him, at the outset, it was not
verified either by Investigating Officer or even by learned trial court
as to whether the appellant himself had knowledge that the currency
in his possession was at all fake.
6. Learned counsel submitted that, it has not been
appreciated whether there was any intention or attempt even to use
currency or to give it for circulation and as such, according to him,
both essential ingredients for attracting the charges were patently
missing.
7. Learned counsel further submitted that, entire case of the
prosecution is rested on four witnesses. There is no independent
-4- Cri Appeal No. 201.2005
witness. Only one independent witness is spot panch. He pointed out
that, apparently, Investigating Officer and informant claims that
currency was found to be kept in the watch pocket inside the pant.
Therefore, it is his submission that, the appellant had kept currency in
said pocket, because the same were genuine and according to him,
had it been fake or counterfeit, he would not have preserved it and
would have rather kept in shirt pocket or front pocket of the pant. He
also took this court through the evidence of PW4 Investigating
Officer, who was cross-examined, and submitted that, case is not
proved beyond reasonable doubt. That, prosecution claims that
money was intended to be circulated by using it in a shop, but no
shopkeeper is examined.
8. For all above reasons, learned counsel submits that, as
essential ingredients for attracting offence under Section 489-C of the
IPC not being available, conviction ought not to have been recorded
by the trial court. In support of above submissions, he seeks reliance
on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the following cases :
i) M. Mammutti Vs. State Of Karnataka, reported in
AIR 1979 SC 1705.
ii) Palanisamy Vs. State Represented by Inspector of
Police, reported in 2023 Live Law (SC) Page 643.
iii) Umashankar Vs. State of Chattisgarh, reported in
AIR 2001 SC 3074.
-5- Cri Appeal No. 201.2005
ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT-STATE :
9. In answer to above, learned APP for the respondent-
State, while supporting the judgment of conviction, pointed out that,
secret information was received by PW2 informant, who planned and
arranged trap and apprehended the appellant and he was found to be
in possession of currency notes. That, said currency notes were got
checked through Security Press and even through cashier of bank
from the special machine, which revealed that the currency notes
were fake and counterfeit. Thus, according to learned APP, the
appellant was in a conscious possession of fake currency notes.
10. Learned APP further pointed out that, before the
appellant could use fake currency notes, he was apprehended. That,
in presence of two panchas, said currency notes were seized. He had
not put any defense nor given any plausible explanation while
answering to statement recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. That,
evidence of prosecution was convincing. The evidence of PW2
informant and PW4 Investigating Officer has remained intact and
therefore, prayers are made for dismissing the appeal for want of
merits.
-6- Cri Appeal No. 201.2005
EVIDENCE BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT :
11. In support of its case, the prosecution has examined in all
four witnesses. Their role and status and the sum and substance of
their evidence can be summarized as under :
PW1 Mr. Ramdas Santaram Gaikwad, Police Head Constable, Police
Station Kranti Chowk. In his substantive evidence at Exhibit 15,
para.2 narrated as under :
"2. At the said place, in presence of panchas, the person of
said person/accused No.1 was searched. And we found that, he
was having 19 currency notes of Rs.100/- each denomination,
in his pocket. On inquiry by Chate, PI, the said person gave his
name as Suresh Deorao Mhaske, r/o Bhavsingpura,
Aurangabad. On further inquiry by Chate, PI, accused No 1
gave the names of his four colleagues, by name--Shakti Bhise,
Subhash Bhise, Pandit Narwade and one more. At the spot
only, a separate panchanama was drawn, by which 19 currency
notes, found with accused No.1, were attached. Accused No 1
alongwith the currency notes was brought to Kranti Chauk PS."
PW2 Informant Dr. Kanchankumar Dashrathrao Chate, Police
Inspector, Police Station Kranti Chowk. Relevant portion of his
evidence at Exhibit 18 is as under :
"1. On 4-7-2004, I was working as Sr. P.I. At Kranti Chauk
P.S. On that day, at about 7 p.m., I received a secret
-7- Cri Appeal No. 201.2005
information that, a person by name Suresh Deorao Mhaske is
trying to deliver a forged currency note to a grocery
shopkeeper in Samta Nagar Chauk, Aurangabad. I immediately
called the two panchas by name Sk Jakir and Syed Mois to the
P.S. I gave this secret information to both these panchas and
also to my staff-members and also have given the instructions,
as to what is to be done. Thereafter, myself alongwith the two
panchas API Kale, informant and other police-staff, went to
Samtanangar by walk. On reaching to Samtanagar chauk, from
a distance, the informant pointed out the person concerned,
i.e. Suresh. Thereafter, myself, with the help of my staff, had
caight the said person, at that spot and it was at about 7-30
p.m. Thereafter, I introduced myself, so also the two panchas,
to said Suresh. And we asked his name, place of residence etc.
He gave his name-as Suresh Deorao Mhaske, r/o Bhimnagar,
Bhavsingpura, Aurangabad. I disclosed him the intention to
apprehend him.
2. At the same spot, in presence of the two panchas, the
person of Suresh was searched. In the search, in the inner
pocket of his pant, nineteen currency notes of Rs.100/- each
denomination were found. I also found with him a visiting card
and two chits giving two different names. Having some
writings thereon. All these articles were taken in possession by
me from him, by drawing a detailed panchanama of it. The
panchanama is signed by both the panchas, so also said Suresh.
The currency notes were kept in an envelope, in the inner
pocket of the pant and the signatures of panchas were also
obtained on that envelope. I identify the panchanama now
-8- Cri Appeal No. 201.2005
shown to me, which bears the signatures of the two panchas
and accused and also of myself. The contents of panchanama
are true and correct and it is marked at Exh.19. The numbers
of the currency notes, which were found with said Suresh, also
mentioned in the panchanama. I identify the nineteen currency
notes now shown to me, the Nos. of which are mentioned in
the panchanama. I also identify the signatures of myself and
panchas on the brown-coloured enveloped, in which the
nineteen currency notes were found with Suresh. The witness
was shown the currency notes and the envelope, having a lable
of panchas' signatures, marked as Article No.1 before the court
and he identified these articles. Thereafter alongwith this
attached property, the accused, the panchas and my staff,
returned to the Kranti Chauk P.S. Aurangabad.
3. In the P.S., I interrogated the accused about his
colleagues and he gave the names of his five colleagues, which
are mentioned in complaint, which I lodged. I lodged the
complaint in behalf of the State against the six accused, named
in the complaint. The contents of the complaint are true and I
identify my signature thereon and it is marked at Exh.20......"
PW3 Syed Moin Syed Majjid, pancha to the seizure panchnama, who
examined at Exh.21 narrated that, in his presence, search was
conducted and the appellant was found to be in possession of
19 currency notes i.e. in his pant pocket and said currency
notes were seized and kept in brown envelope and he caused
signatures over panchanamas as well as envelope.
-9- Cri Appeal No. 201.2005
PW4 Investigating Officer Mr. Vidyanand Murlidhar Kale, Assistant
Police Inspector, Kranti Chowk Police Station. In his substantive
evidence at Exhibit 28, para.1 narrated as under :
"1. On 4-7-2004, I was working as API at Kranti Chauk PS,
Aurangabad. On that day, at about 7 p.m. I was in the cabin of
pw2 Chate, PI, and the informant had come to Chate in the
cabin. The informant gave the information to PI-chate that, in
Samtanagar Chauk, one person is trying to dispose off the
forge-currency-notes. Chate, PI, ascertained for himself the
correctness of the information and then called the two panchas
and other staff of P.S. Thereafter, alongwith informant, and the
two panchas. Myself, Chate, PI, and our staff went to
Samtanagar Chauk by walk. The informant, from the distance,
pointed out the person to me & Chate, PI and that person was
caught at the spot. On inquiry, the said person gave his names
Suresh Mhaske. When his person was searched, in the pocket
of his pant, 19 currency notes of Rs.100/- each denomination
were found. Besides that, visiting-card, a diary and a chit also
were found with him. In presence of the two panchas, at the
same place, those currency notes and other articles were
attached by drawing the panchanama there. After drawing the
panchanama, we all alongwith the said person returned to
Kranti Chauk PS. Chate, PI, lodged the complaint and also
registered the offence No. 182/2004 and its investigation was
entrusted to me."
-10- Cri Appeal No. 201.2005
ANALYSIS
CHARGE UNDER SECTION 489-C OF IPC :
12. Section 489-C of IPC, for ready reference, is reproduced
as under :
"489C. Possession of forged or counterfeit currency-notes
or bank-notes.--Whoever has in his possession any forged
or counterfeit currency-note or bank-note, knowing or
having reason to believe the same to be forged or
counterfeit and intending to use the same as genuine or
that it may be used as genuine, shall be punished with
imprisonment of either description for a term which may
extend to seven years, or with fine, or with both."
13. On complete re-appreciation of evidence, more
particularly, that of PW2 informant and PW4 Investigating Officer,
who were police officers and have carried out the investigation, it is
revealed that, on secret information, trap was laid in Samata Nagar
Chowk and the appellant was apprehended and in his body search, he
was found to be in possession of 19 currency notes of Rs.100/- each.
Same were seized in presence of independent panch i.e. PW3 Syed
Moin, who has supported the prosecution.
14. As regards to genuineness of currency is concerned, it has
come in the evidence of PW4 Investigating Officer that, on
-11- Cri Appeal No. 201.2005
06.07.2004, attached currencies were confronted to cashier of State
Bank of Hyderabad, who, on examination, declared the same to be
counterfeit and forged. Even currencies were referred to Security
Press, Nashik and its report is received, which is marked as Exh.27.
The said report from Currency Press shows that currencies were
counterfeit and forged.
15. Obviously, when investigation was carried out on secret
information, there cannot be independent witnesses. However, here,
PW3 Syed Moin i.e. pancha to the seizure panchanama, is
independent witness and he has supported the prosecution. It is
pertinent to note that, the accused/appellant has not refuted or
denied that he was not at all in possession of currencies. Stand taken
by the accused/appellant vide statement recorded under Section 313
of Cr.P.C. is that, he was not aware and that, he had no knowledge
that the same were counterfeit. However, as pointed out by learned
APP, appellant was in a conscious possession of the counterfeit notes.
Security Press has declared the same to be counterfeit. Essential
ingredients for attracting Section 489-C of IPC are patently available
i.e. possession of forged and counterfeit currency. There is evidence to
that extent.
-12- Cri Appeal No. 201.2005
16. Therefore, on complete re-appreciation of evidence, this
court do not find any infirmity in the manner of appreciation at the
hands of learned trial court. Except making submission that there is
improper appreciation on the aspect of knowledge about currency to
be fake, there is no other convincing ground raised in the appeal. As
stated above, the accused/appellant was apprehended while he was in
possession of counterfeit currency and he offered no explanation for
the same. Therefore, the appeal being devoid of merits, I proceed to
pass following order.
ORDER
The criminal appeal is hereby dismissed.
[ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.]
ASD
