IMRAN ABDULLA SYED Vs. STATE OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present appeal is directed to impugn the legality and correctness of a judgment dated 07.01.2013 of learned Addl. Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.04/2011 arising out of FIR-RC-SIJ-2010 E0006 PS CBI/EOUVI/ New Delhi by which the appellant was held guilty for committing offences punishable under Sections 489B/489C IPC. By an order dated 10.01.2013, he was awarded various prison terms with fine. The sentences were to operate concurrently.

(2.) Briefly stated, the prosecution case as reflected in the charge-sheet was that on 30.08.2010, the appellant was found in possession of Fake Indian Currency Notes (hereinafter referred as 'FICN') amounting to Rs. 11,21,500/- concealed in the walls of his black colour suitcase. The appellant had travelled to Delhi by Pakistan International Airlines, Flight No.PK 0272 to arrive at IGI Airport, Delhi at about 12.44 hours. Specific information was received by Directorate of Revenue Intelligence Office (hereinafter referred as 'DRI') that the appellant would bring with him FICN concealed in his baggage. On receipt of this information, discreet surveillance was mounted at the exit gate of Terminal - III. The appellant was intercepted while he was walking out of the airport gate. On search of his baggage, FICNs, amounting to Rs. 11,21,500/- were recovered. After recording statement under section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962, the appellant was arrested. Statements of the witnesses conversant with the facts were recorded. During investigation, one Usman Mohd. Ali Memon was found to have hatched a conspiracy with the appellant and one Bilal @ Talha in trafficking the FICNs from Pakistan to India. Upon completion of investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the appellant and his associate Usman Mohd. Ali Memon in the Court. In order to establish its case, the prosecution examined six witnesses. In 313 Cr.P.C. statement, the appellant denied his involvement in the crime and pleaded false implication. It is relevant to note that by an order dated 07.10.2011 Usman Mohd. Ali Memon was discharged and the said order remained unchallenged. The appellant did not produce any evidence in defence. The trial resulted in his conviction as aforesaid. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, the instant appeal has been preferred.

(3.) I have heard the leaned counsel for the parties and have examined the file. At the outset, it may be mentioned that learned counsel for the appellant, on instructions, informed that the appellant has opted not to challenge the findings of the Trial Court on conviction. The appellant, however, prayed to take lenient view and to modify the sentence order due to mitigating circumstances whereby he had remained incarcerated for sufficient duration in this case. Learned SPP for CBI has no objection to take into consideration the mitigating circumstances (if any).