KARIM KUNJU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These revision petitions are preferred by the accused in Sessions Case No. 13 of 1970 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Judge, Alleppey. Crl. R. P. 119 of 1971 is by accused Nos. 2 and 4 and Crl. R. P. 127 of 1971 is by accused 1 and 3. They were convicted by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge and sentenced under S.120(B) read with S.439(B) and S.489(C) of the. I. P. C. All the accused (accused Nos. 1 to 4) have been convicted under S.120(B) read with S.489 (B) and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years each. Accused Nos. 1 and 3 have been further convicted under S.489(C) and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years each. Accused No. 1 has further been convicted under S.420 read with S.511 of the I.P C. and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years. The sentences have been directed to run concurrently. The conviction and sentence have been confirmed in appeal by the Sessions Judge of Alleppey.

(2.) The prosecution case stated briefly is as follows: Accused 1 to 4 along with accused 5 and 6 who have been acquitted, were charged by the Central Bureau of Investigation, Special Police Establishment, Cochin for offences falling under S.489(C), 489(B) and 420 read with S.120(B) and 489(B) and (C) read with S.511 I.P.C. The prosecution alleged that the six accused persons conspired together in room No. 41 of Narasimhapuram Lodge at Alleppey, and at the surrounding places on 31-8-1969 and on 1-9-1969 with the object of committing acts falling under S.489(C) and (B) and 420 I.P.C., and entered into an illegal agreement with Pw 1 Ramanandan, Sub Inspector of Police/CBI/ SPE/Cochin who had posed himself as the son of a rich planter, to exchange counterfeit currency notes of 2 rupee denomination for genuine notes of the same denomination. The agreement was that the accused would part with such counterfeit notes worth Rs. 75,000 in exchange for genuine notes of the same denomination worth Rs. 25,000. Pw 1 had earlier met the 3rd accused at Pachalam near Ernakulam and bad enquired of him if he could supply counterfeit notes in exchange for genuine notes. Pw 1 who had disguised himself as the son of a planter, told the 3rd accused that counterfeit notes were required for distribution among the employees of his estate towards their wages. 3rd Accused told Pw 1 that he was not possessed of any counterfeit currency but to his knowledge such false currency could be had from accused Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5 who were residing at Alleppey. This interview between Pw 1 and the 3rd accused took place on 30-8-1969 as instructed by 3rd accused. Pw 1 went to Alleppey the next day and presented himself at the Narasimhapuram Lodge at about 7 p. m. 3rd accused was already waiting there and he took Pw 1 to room No. 41 of the Lodge where accused Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5 were present. He introduced Pw 1 to them, 3rd accused then told Pw 1 that he had discussed the matter already with them and that further details could be talked over by Pw1 himself. Pw 1 accordingly told the accused that he had come to purchase counterfeit notes. 5th accused then told Pw 1 that they had only counterfeit notes of 2 rupee denomination and they were prepared to exchange two such notes for one genuine note. Pw 1 then wanted them to show him specimen notes that they had. At the bidding of 5th accused 4th accused took out from the pouch of his belt a bundle containing about one hundred 2 rupee currency notes and handed them over to Pw 1 who on scrutiny found that they were counterfeit notes of good imitation. Pw1 returned the notes and told the accused that he could raise Rs. 25,000 immediately if they were prepared to exchange at the rate of 3 counterfeit notes for one genuine. The accused thereupon went out of the room and conspired between them for some time and came back to the room and told Pw. 1 that the offer was acceptable to them. It was suggested to Pw.1 that he should come the next day in the same room at about the same time with Rs. 25,000 and that the accused on their part would come with Rs. 75,000 counterfeit notes. Thus they parted.

(3.) The next day i. e., 1-9-1969 in the morning Pw. 1 reported the matter to the Superintendent of Police, Special Police Establishment Cochin, giving a gist of the information collected by him. A case (R. C. 20 of 1969) was thereupon registered by the Dy. S. P., Special Branch. Under directions from the Superintendent of Police, Pw. 1 made 21 bundles of paper cut to the size of 10 rupee notes interspersing in each bundle some genuine 10 rupee currency notes and entrusted the bundle to the Superintendent of Police. On further direction from the Superintendent of Police, Pw. 1 accompanied by Inspector of Police Pw. 2, started for Alleppey and reached near the gate of Central Income Tax office at about 3 p. m. At about 3-30 p. m. the Dy. S. P. and another Inspector of Police Pw. 15, who bad reached there and all the four of them in mufti went to the room of A Ward Income Tax Officer (Pw. 3), who had already received instructions from the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax to render the necessary assistance to Pw. 17 the Dy. S. P. On entering the room with his colleagues, Pw. 1 disclosed their identity to Pw. 3 who immediately called Pw.4, B Ward Income Tax Officer to his room. Pw. 17 had brought with him four bundles of genuine 5 rupee notes, two bundles of genuine 10 rupee notes and twenty one bundles of paper cut to size interspersed with 10 rupee notes. These 27 bundles (M. Os. 21 to 27) were wrapped up in a plastic bag with a zip opening to make it appear that the 27 bundles enclosed in the bag contained Rs. 25,000, though really they contained only Rs. 5,000, the rest being paper cut to size and interspersed.