SATTAR @ BABLU @ BABUL Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure whereby the appellant has challenged the judgment and order dated 07.09.2016 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-II, Malda, arising out of S.C. No.413/2015 and S.T. No.7(10) of 2015 whereunder the learned Trial Judge convicted the appellant for 7 years of R.I. and to pay fine of Rs.2000/- in default to suffer R.I. for 3 months for offence under Section 489(B) of the IPC and to suffer R.I. for 5 years for the offence under Section 489(C) of the IPC with default clause.

(2.) The brief facts leading to the appeal is that the Sub-Inspector Mr. Shovan Karmakar (P.W. 3) received a source information at about 19.20 hours on 19.04.2015 about illegal procurement and transportation of large amount of fake Indian currency notes of a place called Koligram and after noting a general diary started for the said place with force to workout the information. The police force reached at Koligram at about 19.45 hours ambushed in and around Koligram Girls' School. They noticed at about 19.55 hours a person coming by a motor cycle towards Koligram school from Chanchal side who was apprehended by the police and after completion of legal formalities of search and seizure 100 pieces of fake Indian currency notes in denomination of Rs.500/- each, total value of Rs.50,000/- and two pieces of Indian currency notes seems to be genuine in denomination of Rs.500/- each, total Rs.1000/- wrapped in black colour plastic carry bag and the motor cycle were seized under proper seizure list and the appellant was arrested. Chanchal police station case being Chanchal P.S. Case no. 167 dated 2016 dated 19.04.2015 under Sections 489(B) and 489(C) of the Indian Penal Code was registered against the appellant.

(3.) After committal of the case to the Court of Sessions, the same was made over to the Additional Sessions Judge, FTC-II, Chanchal for trial and disposal. Trial started upon framing of charges under Section 489(B) and 489(C) IPC vide order dated 06.10.2015 to which the appellant abjured the guilt and claimed to be tried. Then prosecution examined as many as 7 witnesses to bring home charges framed against the appellant. On completion of prosecution evidence, the appellant was examined under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. to which he declined to adduce defence witness.