SOUKAT ALI Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction dated 10th December, 2014 and 11th December, 2014 delivered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge 1st Fast Track Court, Jangipur in Sessions Trial No. 9 (8)13 arising out of Sessions Case No. 257 of 2013 whereby and whereunder the learned Judge has convicted the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 489 C of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 6 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 6 months.

(2.) Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the such order of conviction and sentence the appellant has preferred this appeal on amongst other grounds that the learned Trial Court could not appreciate the evidence on record in its true spirit and learned trial Court has erroneously decided the matter against the appellant and thereby convicted the appellant for the offence under Section 489 C of the Indian Penal Code when the trial Court did not find any evidence against the appellant for the offence under Section 489 (B) of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant contended that exclusive possession of such fake Indian currency notes in respect of the appellant is the sine quo non to bring home the charge under Section 489 C of the Indian Penal Code but the prosecution has failed to bring home the charge and could not produce any reliable and trustworthy witness to prove that such fake Indian currency notes were recovered from the exclusive possession of the appellant. Chance of planting of such fake Indian currency notes with the appellant, in that view of this matter, cannot be ruled out. It is further submitted on behalf of the appellant that the prosecution also could not produce any evidence of the place of occurrence about recovery of such fake Indian currency notes from the possession of the appellant and that the factum of seizure ought to be discarded for non-compliance of the mandatory provision of Section 100 (4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In other words, the mandatory provision of Section 100 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Code has been given a complete go bye at the time of alleged seizure of such articles/fake Indian currency notes from the possession of the appellant.