LAWS(CHH)-2010-3-11

KURUKSHETRA SENA Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Decided On March 25, 2010
KURUKSHETRA SENA Appellant
V/S
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Criminal Appeal No. 2/2004 filed by Kurukshetra Sena, Criminal Appeal No. 22/2004 filed by Narendra Kumar Jain, Criminal Appeal No. 43 filed by Rawalmal Jain and Criminal Appeal No. 52/2004 filed by Narsingh Lal Maheshwari, Babulal Inadi and T. Appal Suri are arising out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 10.12.2003 passed by the Special Judge under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Jagdalpur, in Sessions Trial No. 107/2002, therefore, they are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) The aforesaid criminal appeals are directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 10.12.2003 passed by the Special Judge under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Jagdalpur, in Sessions Trial No. 107/2002, whereby and whereunder learned Special Judge after holding appellant Narendra Kumar Jain guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 489 B and 489 C read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/ -, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for nine months and rigorous imprisonment for two years and six months and to pay fine of Rs. 6000/ -, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for nine months and appellants Narsingh Lal, Kurushetra Sena, Babulal Inadi, Rawalmal Jain and T. Appal Suri guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 489 C read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code and each of them have sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and six months and to pay fine of Rs. 7000/ -, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for nine months, respectively.

(3.) Conviction is impugned on the ground that without there being any evidence, especially conscious possession of fake currency notes with intent to use the same as genuine, the Court below has convicted and sentenced the appellants as aforementioned the thereby committed illegality.