JOTY PRASHAD Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The sole appellant herein was tried along with five others for offences punishable under Sections 254, 255, 258, 259, 467 read with 120-B, I.P.C. The gravamen of the charge was that all of them conspired and agreed to do the illegal act of counterfeiting of Government stamps and in pursuance of that conspiracy, counterfeited Government stamps and sold the same and they were also found in possession of the counterfeit stamps and some of them were found in possession of instruments and other materials intended to be used for the purpose of counterfeiting stamps. The trial Court acquitted all of them. The State preferred an appeal. The High Court while confirming the acquittal of other accused, however, convicted the appellant Joti Parshad under Ss. 258 and 259, I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo three years' R.I. and a fine of Rs. 500/- on each count and in default of payment of fine to undergo further R. I. for three months on each count, on the ground that the prosecution proved that the appellant had been selling counterfeit court-fee stamps and while doing so he had knowledge or at least reason to believe that the said stamps which he was selling were counterfeit. The sentences were directed to run concurrently. The facts that give rise to this appeal are as follows.

(2.) Shri M. G. Devashayam, who was working as S.D.M., Jagadhari, noticed on 26th July, 1972 that some counterfeit court-fee stamps had been used on some Court papers. He immediately conducted a raid and searched the box containing judicial and non-judicial stamps belonging to the appellant who was a licenced stamp vendor. Shri Devashayam seized them under a memo and then sent a letter to the police station for registration of a case. P.W. 15 the Inspector registered the case and took up the investigation. On the same day he recorded the statement of the appellant wherein he is alleged to have stated that some of the other accused belonging to Dehradun had been selling counterfeit court-fee stamps to him at Jagadhari and if their houses are searched, such stamps could be recovered. P.W.15 reached Dehradun the next day and interrogated Rajeshwar, A-2 and recorded his statement and at his instance recovered a large number of stamps. P.W. 15 also recorded the statements of other accused and effected some recoveries under some memos. After completion of the investigation the charge-sheet was laid. The prosecution charge-sheeted 10 accused. Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala, however, discharged four of them as no prima facie case was made out against them. The remaining six accused were tried by the Additional Sessions Judge. The prosecution examined several witnesses. The plea of the accused had been one of denial. For the purpose of the present case we are not concerned with that part of the prosecution, case against A-2 to A-5 whose acquittal has been confirmed by the High Court. So far the present appellant is concerned he took the plea that he was a petty stamp vendor at Jagadhari and he was arrested on mere suspicion and that he purchased all the stamps judicial as well as non-judicial from the treasury at Jagadhari for sale to the public and that he had no link or any connection with the other accused. The trial court acquitted all the accused mainly on the ground that P.W. 11 Madan Lal had been appearing as a police witness in a number of cases and that his antecedents are questionable and many of the seizures based on his evidence cannot be accepted. Before the High Court the same plea was taken by all the accused. The Division Bench of the High Court agreed with the reasoning of the trial Court so far as the other accused are concerned and confirmed their acquittal. However, the case regarding the recovery of counterfeit stamps from the possession of the appellant was accepted mainly on the basis of the evidence of P.W. 1 Shri M. G. Devashayam, S.D.M. The appellant specifically admitted the recovery but took the plea that he had purchased all the stamps from the treasury at Jagadhari as genuine stamps. The stamps recovered from the appellant were sent to the Stamp Expert at Nasik. P.W.14, the Stamp Expert examined the same and identified -the various court-fee stamps of various denominations which had been counterfeited. His evidence coupled with the report Ex.P.W. 14/A established beyond any shadow of doubt that some of the stamps recovered from the appellant were counterfeit ones. The appellant also admitted in his statement under Section 313, Cr. P.C. that he had been selling those stamps but his plea was that he purchased them as such from the treasury thereby indicating that officers connected with the treasury who sold those stamps to him must be held to be responsible and that the appellant had neither knowledge nor any reason to believe that they were counterfeit stamps. Therefore he is not liable for any penal action. The High Court taking into consideration the circumstance that counterfeit stamps were recovered from the appellant concluded that the appellant had knowledge or reason to believe that the stamps which he had been selling were counterfeit ones and accordingly found him guilty as stated above.

(3.) Chapter XII of the Indian Penal Code deals with the offences relating to coins and government stamps. Sections 255 to 263-A, I.P.C. in this Chapter deal with offences relating to government stamps. For the purpose of present case we are concerned only with Sections 258 and 259 and they are in the following terms :