RAMNIWAS MEENA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appearing counsel for the parties are heard on I.A. No. 25445/17 filed under section 389 (1) of the Cr.P.C , 1973alleged first application in this Criminal Appeal on behalf of appellant for suspension of custodial sentence and the record of the trial court including impugned judgment and objection/reply filed on behalf of respondent/State are also perused.

(2.) Appellant Ramniwas has been convicted and sentenced by the Third Additional Sessions Judge, Guna vide judgment dated 13.12. 2017 passed in session trial no. 49/2010, under section 489-B of the IPC to undergo 10 years RI with a fine of Rs. 10,000/- with default stipulation and under section 489-C of the IPC to undergo 7 years RI with a fine of Rs. 10,000/- with default stipulation and it is also directed that main jail sentences of the appellant to run concurrently.

(3.) Appearing counsel for the appellant placing reliance on the cases of Panna Lal Gupta v. State of Sikkim (2010) CRI. L.J. 825) , M. Mammutti v. State of Karnanata ( AIR 1979 Supreme Court 1705 ) and Umashanker v. State of Chhattisgarh (2001) 9 Supreme Court Cases 642) contended that in the light of above mentioned citations for convicting accused under section 489-B and 489-C of the IPC, it was necessary for the prosecution to prove that the appellant Ramnivas was knowing or having reason to believe that the currency notes which he was having were forged or counterfeit and there was no reliable or trustworthy evidence produced by the prosecution before the trial court, which could demonstrate that appellant Ramniwas was knowing or having reasons to believe that the currency notes possessed by him were forged or counterfeit and in absence of positive evidence, trial court erred in convicting and sentencing him for above mentioned offences as there was no evidence against the appellant Ramniwas that he even tried to use fake or counterfeit currency notes as genuine currency. It is further argued that according to case of prosecution firstly two Co-accused persons Mustaqim and Azad were caught hold with fake or counterfeit currency notes of denomination of Rs. 5,00/-and on the basis of disclosure statement given by above mentioned Mustaqim and Azad, police party caught hold three persons, namely, Maya, Manoj and Ramniwas from a place about 100 meters before village Bamori in the way, and thereafter from the left pocket of pant of appellant 40 notess of denomination of Rs. 5,00/- were seized from appellant Ramniwas, and though the examined panch witness Rakesh (PW-3) relating to seizure memo (Ex. P-9) did not support the prosecution case and even denied from identifying the appellant at the time of recording of his evidence and Rakesh (PW-3) was declared hostile by the prosecution and another panch witness Dinesh (PW-9) of seizure memo, was not produced before the trial court as a witness, and the trial court only on the basis of evidence of seizing officer, S.H.O Police Station, Kumbhraj found proved that in total 40 fake or counterfeit notes of denomination of Rs. 5,00/- were seized from the appellant, therefore, it is vehemently argued that appellant Ramniwas is having a fit case for granting him benefit of suspension of his jail sentence, as there is no possibility of early hearing of this Criminal Appeal before this court. Hence it is prayed that his jail sentence be suspended.