Sujoy Mondal & Anr vs Unknown
2021 Latest Caselaw 464 Cal

22.01.2021 Mithun Sl. No.27.

D/L.

Ct.No.30 CRA/265/2020 with I.A.No: CRAN/1/2020

In re: An application under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for bail in connection with appeal.

In the matter of : Sujoy Mondal & Anr.

...the appellants.

Mr. Tapas Kumar Adhikari, Adv., Mr. Abhijit Ghosh, Adv.

...for the appellants.

Mr.P.K.Datta, APP, Mr.Santanu Deb Roy, Adv.

...for the State.

It is submitted by the learned Advocate for the

appellants/petitioners that out of nine witnesses on behalf

of the prosecution, five public witnesses were declared

hostile. The four other witnesses who supported the

prosecution's case are witnesses from the police

department. There evidence cast a doubt on the very fact

of search and seizure in presence of them as P.W.1 and

P.W.2 stated in their evidence that the police officer (Mejo

babu) showed fake currency notes and stated to them that

the said currency notes were recovered from the

possession of the appellants. Thus, the seizure of fake

currency notes were not made in presence of the said

witnesses. Only on the basis of the solitary evidence of

the police officer, who is also the informant of this case,

the accused persons were convicted for committing

offence under Sections 489B/489C of the Indian Penal

Code and accordingly, they should be released on bail.

Learned P.P.-in-Charge, on the other hand, submits

that the police personnel corroborated the evidence of

search and seizure and recovery of fake currency notes

from the possession of the accused persons. Secondly,

those seized currency notes were examined scientifically

and a report was submitted by the concerned authority as

to the forged and fake character of the seized currency

notes. In view of such circumstances, the learned P.P.-in-

Charge has raised serious objection against the prayer for

bail.

I have carefully perused the impugned judgment and

the evidence adduced by the witnesses. From the

evidence of P.W.1 and P.W.2, it transpires that they

accompanied the police officers to Ranibagan where the

accused persons were apprehended and search and

seizure was made. Therefore, it cannot be said that fake

currency notes were seized in the absence of P.W.1 and

P.W.2. They are police personnel. No suggestion has

been made to the effect during cross-examination of the

said two witnesses that they had previous enmity with the

appellants. The appellants were not only convicted for

committing offence under Section 489C of the Indian Penal

Code but also under Section 489B of the Indian Penal Code

for using the fake currency notes in market for illegal

purposes. Considering the materials, I am not inclined to

release the petitioner on bail. Prayer for bail is, thus,

rejected.

(Bibek Chaudhuri, J)