PURAN CHAND Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PURAN Chand has been convicted under section 489 B, Indian, Penal Code and sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2000/ - in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months by the order of the Addl. Session Judge, Kurukshetra dated April 9, 1985. He has challenged has conviction and sentence through the present appeal.

(2.) THE prosecution story is, what there is a firm at Kaithal in the name and style of M/s. Jai Narain Dass Ram Kumar. The appellant is an employee of that firm. On December 13, 1983, the appellant went to State of India, Talai Bazar, Kaithal, with a sum of Rs. 66707.50 of containing in a number of packets and for that amount be had to purchase two drafts on behalf of his employer firm. He, presented these packets of money to shri Ashok Kumar, P.W.who was then working as Cashier at the counter. Ashok Kumar P.W. was posted as a Cash Officer in the Bank. He counted the currency notes of one of the packets, While counting he suspected one currency note of the denomination of Rs. 100/. to be of inferior quality as the printing was rough and gold line missing. He suspected the currency note to be a forged one. He went to Shri D. K. Jain, P.W. who was Branch Manager of the Bank and showed him the packets of the currency notes containing the suspected note. The packet was untied and that note was taken out of it. But before that, Ram Kumar and Vir Bhan, two partners of the employer firm of the appellant had been summoned to the Bank by the Branch Manager and the packet was untied in their presence. Ram Kumar gave another currency note of the denomination of Rs. 100/ - to the Bank Manager and got the required drafts prepared. The suspected note which was taken out of that packet is Exhibit P. 1.

(3.) THE Bank Manager range up the police and also sent them a letter Exhibit PB for registration of the case. On receipt of letter Exhibit PB S.I. Mange Ram recorded the first information report and started investigation. The investigation was entrusted to Tahil Singh S.I. letter on. He went to the Bank premises and recorded the statements of the December 16, 1983, Section 1. Tabil Singh took into possession the said note Exhibit P. 1 from the Bank Manager vide recovery Memo. Exhibit P. A. On return to the Police Station, he made over the note Exhibit P -1 to the Moharrir Head Constable, who in. turn sent the note to the Bank Note Press Devas. The opinion of the Bank Note Press was that the note was forged. After completing the investigation, the appellant was challaned, convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge.