TULCHASINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal by the accused Tulchasingh and Moolsingh, the former having been convicted under sec. 489-B and the latter under sec. 489-G of the Penal Code, and both having been sentenced to five years' rigorous imprisonment and in addition to a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default to one year's further rigorous imprisonment each, by the judgment of the Sessions Judge, Balotra dated the 23rd December, 1963. The appellant Moolsingh was acquitted under sec. 489 B with which he was also charged.

(2.) THE case for the prosecution is this. It is alleged that on the 28th September, 1960, a Special Excise Raid Party organised by the excise Inspector Balotra Trilokinarain Temini P. W. 4 and Tejraj, Excise Inspector, Sojat, P. W. 5, raided the Dhani of the accused Tulchasingh as they suspected that he was manufacturing and selling illicit liquor and also selling opium. Tulchasingh was away from his Dhani but the other accused Moolsingh was present. On a search of the Dhani having been made, some illicit liquor and opium are said to have been discovered but with that we are not concerned, and what is of importance to mention is that seventeen counterfeit currency notes of the denomination of Rs. 100/- each were found lying in a box in Tulchasingh's 'jhumpa', the key of which was with the accused Moolsingh who gave it to the excise officers. This find was accompanied by a receipt Article 1. THE receipt is dated the 2nd December, 1956, add purports to have been issued by the Collector, Barmer, to Tulchasingh in respect of a certain licence-fee paid by him for fire-arm. A first information report (Ex. P-4) was then lodged on the 29th September, 1960, at police station Mandli. THE notes were sealed and were in due course sent to the Master, Currency-Note Press, Nasik, for examination. THE Master found vide his report Ex. P-3 that the notes were clearly and unmistakably forged and counterfeit. Both the accused were in due course prosecuted and have been convicted as already stated above.

(3.) FOR the (reasons mentioned above I hold that the accused Tulchasingh is guilty of an offence under sec. 489 C and sentence him to three years' rigorous imprisonment.