SHAILESH SHANITLAL RAVAL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by the appellant under Sec. 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgement and order dtd. 4/12/2017 passed by the learned 10th Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) (hereinafter referred to as the 'learned Trial Court') in a common judgment passed in Sessions Case No. 43 of 2016 and Sessions Case No. 250 of 2016.

(2.) The brief facts of the case of the prosecution gathered from the record of the case are as under :

(3.) Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgement and order of conviction, the appellant has filed the present appeal mainly stating that the prosecution has failed to prove the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubts and the entire case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence. The recovery of the fake currency notes as also the recovery of the printer is not proved and the printer is not recovered from the premises of the applicant. During investigation, the other accused could not be traced and no charge could be framed against them and the panch witnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution and hence, the recovery of the fake currency notes from the possession of the appellant is not proved beyond reasonable doubts. The printer that has been recovered during investigation is an ordinary printer available in the market and there is no evidence to show that the premises from where the printer is recovered was in the possession of the appellant. The learned Trial Court has in para nine of the judgement recorded that the case of the prosecution is not supported by any independent witnesses and the independent panch witnesses have been declared hostile and the evidence is not substantiated and supported by any collateral reliable evidence to inspire confidence on the case of the prosecution. The impugned judgement and order is bad in law and is required to be quashed and set aside.