In Re: Ketabul Sk. @Kitabul Sk vs State Of West Bengal
2021 Latest Caselaw 4222 Cal

12.08.2021
Item no.4
Ct.30
  PA
                                         C.R.A. No.298 of 2020

                                        (Via Video Conference)

             In Re:- An appeal under Section 21(4) of the National Investigation
             Agency Act,2008, in connection with NIA Case No. 03 of 2018 of
             Learned Judge Special Court at Calcutta, under NIA Act,
             corresponding to S.T. No. 04(04) of 2019 and RC- 25/2018/NIA-DLI
             dated 16.08.2018, arising out of Farakka Police Station Case No.
             297     of   2018      dated     31.07.2018,     under    Sections
             489B/489C/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

             In re: Ketabul Sk. @Kitabul Sk.
                                                ... appellant/petitioner.

             Mr. Sourav Chatterjee, Adv.
             Mr. Avik Ghatak, Adv.
             Mr. Amit Ranjan Pati, Adv.
             Md. Wasim Akram, Adv.
                                              ...For the appellant/petitioner.

             Mr. Y.J. Dastoor, Ld. A.S.G.
             Mr. Debashish Tandon, Ld. P.P.

                                              .... For the N.I.A.



                    This criminal appeal under Section 21(4) of the National

              Investigation Agency Act, 2008, is directed against the order dated

              11.12.2020, passed by the learned Judge, Special Court, Calcutta,

              under N.I.A. Act, in N.I.A. Case No. 03 of 2018, by which the

              appellant's prayer for bail, was rejected.

                    Admittedly, the name of the appellant is transpired in the

              supplementary charge-sheet.

                    According to Mr. Chatterjee, learned advocate for the

              appellant, on the basis of purported statement of co-accused,

              appellant/petitioner   has   been   languishing     in   custody   since
                               2




29.05.2018

, even without any actual recovery of FICN from his

possession.

That no evidence was collected by the investigating agency

during the course of further investigation, and thus the N.I.A. had

failed to come up against the appellant with convincing materials,

other than the purported statement of co-accused. That appellant

having been roped in this case at a belated stage, there left serious

doubt regarding his involvement in the present case. The leading

statement of co-accused, according to appellant, should not have

been used to discover the whereabouts of the co-accused person,

like the instant appellant.

Upon advancing such submissions, Mr. Chatterjee, learned

advocate for the appellant, tried to impress upon us that since

there had been sufficient delay caused in the progress of the trial,

appellant/petitioner should be extended with the privilege of bail.

Reliance was placed by Mr. Chatterjee, on a decision

reported in 2014 SCC OnLine Cal 18497, delivered in the case of

Sarvesh Pathak @ Kallu & Anr. Vs. State of West Bengal,

wherein it was held that without any recovery of fake currency

notes, there cannot be any prosecution under Section 489(C)

I.P.C., and in order to make out an offence punishable under

Section 489(B), there must be some materials to show that those

fake notes were actually used, or trafficked, meaning thereby that

there was a transaction involving those forged notes, and referring

such decision Mr. Chatterjee contended that without proof of

previous transaction involving the FICN, it was very hard to believe

that appellant had any active role, in the alleged trafficking of

forged Indian currency notes.

Reliance was further placed on another decision reported in

2020 SCC OnLine Cal 1501, rendered in the case of Ajoy Das &

Ors. Vs. State of West Bengal, and deriving capital from such

decision Mr. Chatterjee submitted that the seized mobile phone,

not being owned by the appellant, mere seizure of multiple SIM

cards alone, without proof of ownership of appellant over the

seized mobile, would not be sufficient enough to establish the

telephonic conversation, allegedly held by appellant with co-

accused persons with use of such seized items, and thus the

conduct attributable to the alleged trafficking of counterfeited

Indian currency notes went unsubstantiated.

Learned Additional Solicitor General raised objection against

the prayer for bail submitting that trial of this case is in progress,

and in the meantime evidence of four (4) witnesses had already

been collected, and at this stage if the appellant is released on bail,

there is fair chance of abscondence causing the trial to be seriously

impeded.

Drawing our attention to some of the statements including

protected witness, as shown in supplementary charge-sheet,

learned Additional Solicitor General vehemently opposed the

prayer for bail contending that a deep rooted conspiracy had been

hatched up in procuring and circulating counterfeited Indian

currency notes, to which this appellant made active contribution,

and though there had been no actual recovery of FICN from

appellant, but in view of the ramification of this case in

Bangladesh, wherefrom the appellant allegedly procured the FICN

and supplied the same to Abdul Rahim (co-accused) leading to

recovery of FICN with a face value of Rs. 1,92,000/- from Abdul

Rahim (co-accused), the involvement of appellant should not be

lost sight of, and would definitely attract charge of trafficking

against the appellant.

More so, there had been recovery of two SIM cards with three

other items connected with mobile phone from the possession of

the appellant, and upon verification of tower location, it could be

learnt that appellant had held conversation with co-accused

persons in the interest of trafficking of forged Indian currency

notes.

In reply to the decisions, referred above, learned Additional

Solicitor General submitted that both the judgments being

distinguishable on facts, the profit of such decisions would not be

attracted in the facts and circumstances of this case.

Having considered the submission of both sides in context

with the materials placed on record, it appears that prayer for bail

has been advanced in this case taking the ground of long

incarceration, delay in the progress of trial together with absence

of ingredients of charging Sections in the midst of trial, when there

has already been examination of four (4) witnesses.

True it is that FICN to the tune of Rs. 1,92,000/- could not

be recovered from the possession of appellant. But the role of the

appellant, as one of the members to the conspiracy, allegedly

performed behind the procurement and circulation of counterfeited

Indian notes, even going upto the extent of establishing contact

with Bangladeshi National cannot be ruled out from the materials,

so placed.

Actual recovery of FICN in the given facts and circumstances

would not matter much, but the materials so far placed, prima

facie, establish a reasonable nexus of appellant with co-accused in

the procurement and circulation of counterfeited Indian currency

notes, which has direct impact on Indian economy, and upon

sensing its ramification, we are of the considered view that this is

not a fit case, where the privilege of bail should be granted.

The judgements referred by appellant are distinguishable on

facts, and as such would hardly find any scope for its due

application over the facts and circumstances of this case.

The prayer for bail is rejected.

Since, the appellant is in custody, and since the learned

advocate for the appellant expressed his annoyance regarding the

delay in the progress of trial, we take notice of such issue, and

request the learned Trial Judge to show his all promptitude

expediting the trial so that logical conclusion of the case may be

reached at the earliest.

The criminal appeal, accordingly, stands dismissed.

All concerned parties shall act in terms of the copy of the

order downloaded from the official website of this Court.

(Subhasis Dasgupta, J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)